Triple
T32344918
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Tucker |
E826430
|
entity |
| Predicate | caseHeldThat |
P135216
|
FINISHED |
| Object | failure to give full Miranda warnings did not require exclusion of testimony of a witness discovered through the defendant’s unwarned but voluntary statements |
—
|
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: failure to give full Miranda warnings did not require exclusion of testimony of a witness discovered through the defendant’s unwarned but voluntary statements | Statement: [Tucker, caseHeldThat, failure to give full Miranda warnings did not require exclusion of testimony of a witness discovered through the defendant’s unwarned but voluntary statements]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: caseHeldThat Context triple: [Tucker, caseHeldThat, failure to give full Miranda warnings did not require exclusion of testimony of a witness discovered through the defendant’s unwarned but voluntary statements]
-
A.
supremeCourtHolding
Indicates that a decision or legal principle has been formally established by a supreme court as the authoritative resolution of a legal issue.
-
B.
SupremeCourtHoldingRelatedTo
Indicates that there is a connection between a Supreme Court holding and another legal element, such as a case, issue, statute, or principle, to which that holding specifically relates.
-
C.
lawsuitRelatedSupremeCourtHolding
Indicates that the lawsuit is connected to, influenced by, or governed by a specific holding or decision of the Supreme Court.
-
D.
doctrineHeld
Indicates that an agent adheres to, supports, or maintains a particular doctrine or set of principles.
-
E.
courtHeld
chosen
Indicates that a court has formally decided, ruled, or determined a particular legal issue or question.
- 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_69f34914dfc48190a390cd0720d9e86f |
completed | April 30, 2026, 12:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f6e02ba6b881908dfafc52d3b75f1c |
completed | May 3, 2026, 5:42 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f6de09c2f481909f8b2545d3208c9f |
completed | May 3, 2026, 5:32 a.m. |
Created at: May 1, 2026, 12:48 a.m.