Triple
T27762029
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | United States of America v. Wilhelm List et al. |
E701493
|
entity |
| Predicate | legalDoctrineDiscussed |
P4756
|
FINISHED |
| Object | command responsibility |
—
|
LITERAL 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: command responsibility | Statement: [United States of America v. Wilhelm List et al., legalDoctrineDiscussed, command responsibility]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: legalDoctrineDiscussed Context triple: [United States of America v. Wilhelm List et al., legalDoctrineDiscussed, command responsibility]
-
A.
legalDoctrine
chosen
Indicates that one legal principle, rule, or theory is being applied, referenced, or relied upon as an authoritative basis for interpreting or deciding a legal issue.
-
B.
legalDoctrineChallenged
Indicates that a particular legal doctrine is being disputed, questioned, or contested, typically through litigation or formal legal argument.
-
C.
legalDoctrineInfluenced
Indicates that one legal doctrine has shaped, informed, or contributed to the development or interpretation of another legal doctrine.
-
D.
involvedInLegalDoctrine
Indicates that an entity plays a role in the formation, interpretation, application, or development of a particular legal doctrine.
-
E.
legalConcept
Indicates a relationship where something is classified or treated as a concept defined and governed by law or legal theory.
- F. None of above.
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_69ef6a5193808190816eb7d0020b2d87 |
completed | April 27, 2026, 1:53 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69fcab6e888881908ca9e18660928a40 |
completed | May 7, 2026, 3:10 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69fc4562a5b88190bad48f083a6dcdfa |
completed | May 7, 2026, 7:55 a.m. |
Created at: April 27, 2026, 4:27 p.m.