Triple
T32251995
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Hensley v. Eckerhart |
E823907
|
entity |
| Predicate | partyStatusOfPlaintiff |
P60373
|
FINISHED |
| Object | prevailing party |
—
|
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: prevailing party | Statement: [Hensley v. Eckerhart, partyStatusOfPlaintiff, prevailing party]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: partyStatusOfPlaintiff Context triple: [Hensley v. Eckerhart, partyStatusOfPlaintiff, prevailing party]
-
A.
partyTypePlaintiffs
Indicates the classification or category of the parties serving as plaintiffs in a legal action.
-
B.
litigantStatus
Indicates the legal role or standing a party holds in a lawsuit or legal proceeding (e.g., plaintiff, defendant, appellant).
-
C.
partyStatusInAppeal
Indicates the role or standing a party holds within a specific appeal proceeding (e.g., appellant, respondent, intervenor).
-
D.
defendantStatus
Indicates the legal condition or standing of a defendant within a judicial or law-enforcement process.
-
E.
partyStatusContext
chosen
Indicates the contextual status or role a party holds within a specific situation, event, or legal/transactional framework.
- 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_69f3490cdda88190a9d61e11252a771f |
completed | April 30, 2026, 12:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f7465687bc8190a9da44d62b634ed7 |
completed | May 3, 2026, 12:57 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f743f4ceb08190a21fe7f4a99b166b |
completed | May 3, 2026, 12:47 p.m. |
Created at: May 1, 2026, 12:41 a.m.