Triple
T32928912
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Baron Eldon |
E842345
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasNotableLegalInfluence |
P62483
|
FINISHED |
| Object | English law |
—
|
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: English law | Statement: [Baron Eldon, hasNotableLegalInfluence, English law]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasNotableLegalInfluence Context triple: [Baron Eldon, hasNotableLegalInfluence, English law]
-
A.
hasCommonLegalInfluence
Indicates that two or more entities are subject to, shaped by, or governed under the same legal authority, framework, or precedent.
-
B.
influencedCourtDecision
Indicates that one entity had an effect on or contributed to the outcome of a court’s decision regarding another entity or matter.
-
C.
influencedByCourtCase
Indicates that an entity’s state, decision, or development is shaped or altered as a result of a specific court case or its outcome.
-
D.
hasLegalRelevanceIn
chosen
Indicates that something is legally significant, applicable, or has consequences within a specified legal context, case, or jurisdiction.
-
E.
legalDoctrineInfluenced
Indicates that one legal doctrine has shaped, informed, or contributed to the development or interpretation of another legal doctrine.
- 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_69f34948adfc8190a937f1f622783c0b |
completed | April 30, 2026, 12:21 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_6a016b2629c48190befb10581560d58f |
completed | May 11, 2026, 5:37 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_6a0167d5a2088190a68dbd2b87f73e80 |
completed | May 11, 2026, 5:23 a.m. |
Created at: May 1, 2026, 1:20 a.m.