Triple
T2586379
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Hugo L. Black |
E58013
|
entity |
| Predicate | notableWork |
P4
|
FINISHED |
| Object | opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent) |
E57400
|
NE FINISHED |
How this triple was built (2 steps)
Every LLM step that produced this triple, in pipeline order — named-entity classification, the disambiguation choices (the exact options shown, with the pick highlighted), and the generated description. The batch + timestamp of each is in the Provenance table below.
NER
Named-entity recognition
gpt-5-mini
Instruction
Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).
Input
Phrase: opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent) | Statement: [Hugo L. Black, notableWork, opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent)]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent) Context triple: [Hugo L. Black, notableWork, opinion in Betts v. Brady (dissent)]
-
A.
dissenting opinion in Miranda v. Arizona
The dissenting opinion in Miranda v. Arizona is Justice Byron R. White’s critique of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that established mandatory police warnings to suspects, arguing it unduly restricted effective law enforcement.
-
B.
Betts v. Brady
chosen
Betts v. Brady was a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held indigent defendants in state criminal cases were not automatically entitled to court-appointed counsel, a rule later overturned by Gideon v. Wainwright.
-
C.
Olmstead v. United States dissent
The Olmstead v. United States dissent is Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s influential Supreme Court opinion arguing that wiretapping without a warrant violates constitutional privacy rights and foreshadowing modern interpretations of the Fourth Amendment.
-
D.
Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action)
Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action) is Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s powerful Supreme Court dissent criticizing a Michigan constitutional amendment that banned race-conscious admissions policies in public universities.
-
E.
Opinion in Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1852)
The Opinion in Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1852) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that helped define the scope of the Commerce Clause by allowing certain local regulations affecting interstate commerce when they address inherently local matters.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Provenance (3 batches)
The batch behind each pipeline step, in order, with when it ran. Timestamps are batch-level — stages were processed in waves, so the object chain (NER → NED1 → NEDg → NED2) reads in order, but predicate / elicitation batches can sit in a different wave.
| Step | Stage | Batch ID | Status | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| creating | Elicitation | batch_69ab4ac019c8819094add11c46706e32 |
completed | March 6, 2026, 9:44 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69abd3f6f6ac8190abff7b8b6ff3c023 |
completed | March 7, 2026, 7:29 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69af6581f6fc819099ea28ecbb0093d7 |
completed | March 10, 2026, 12:27 a.m. |
Created at: March 6, 2026, 9:49 p.m.