Triple

T3821854
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. E88589 entity
Predicate relatedCase P3137 FINISHED
Object Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney
Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney is a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the standard for proving unconstitutional sex discrimination by requiring a showing of discriminatory intent rather than merely discriminatory impact.
E391917 NE FINISHED

How this triple was built (4 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: Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney | Statement: [Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., relatedCase, Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney
Context triple: [Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., relatedCase, Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney]
  • A. Cooley v. Board of Wardens
    Cooley v. Board of Wardens is an 1852 U.S. Supreme Court decision that helped define the scope of the Commerce Clause by allowing states to regulate certain local aspects of commerce, such as port pilotage, without violating federal authority.
  • B. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
    Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
  • C. Frontiero v. Richardson
    Frontiero v. Richardson is a landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that advanced gender equality by striking down federal benefit rules that discriminated against female military service members.
  • D. Employment Division v. Smith
    Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.
  • E. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon
    Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon is a state agency responsible for administering employment-related services and regulations in Oregon, including unemployment insurance and workforce programs.
  • F. None of above. chosen
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NEDg Description generation gpt-5.1
Instruction
Generate a one-sentence description of the target entity. 
You are given a context triple in the form (subject, predicate, object), where the object is the target entity. 
# Instructions
Use the triple to infer relevant information about the entity. Describe the entity based on what is most defining, well-known. 
Avoid repeating the information from the triple, unless really essential.
# Response Format
Return only the sentence: "Description: [one-sentence description of the target entity]"
Input
Entity: Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney
Triple: [Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., relatedCase, Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney]
Generated description
Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney is a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the standard for proving unconstitutional sex discrimination by requiring a showing of discriminatory intent rather than merely discriminatory impact.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney
Target entity description: Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney is a 1979 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the standard for proving unconstitutional sex discrimination by requiring a showing of discriminatory intent rather than merely discriminatory impact.
  • A. Cooley v. Board of Wardens
    Cooley v. Board of Wardens is an 1852 U.S. Supreme Court decision that helped define the scope of the Commerce Clause by allowing states to regulate certain local aspects of commerce, such as port pilotage, without violating federal authority.
  • B. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
    Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
  • C. Frontiero v. Richardson
    Frontiero v. Richardson is a landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that advanced gender equality by striking down federal benefit rules that discriminated against female military service members.
  • D. Employment Division v. Smith
    Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.
  • E. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon
    Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon is a state agency responsible for administering employment-related services and regulations in Oregon, including unemployment insurance and workforce programs.
  • F. None of above. chosen

Provenance (5 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_69aed9538cf881909d9ce8ca4ac7c18c completed March 9, 2026, 2:29 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69aeea62cdfc81909a3bf458b73d60e7 completed March 9, 2026, 3:42 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69b4fb4998248190b4174dd80a8e790c completed March 14, 2026, 6:08 a.m.
NEDg Description generation batch_69b4ffcf7e24819098cf2e46b92bed4a completed March 14, 2026, 6:27 a.m.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) batch_69b500596e308190a31e44c24de3f31d completed March 14, 2026, 6:29 a.m.
Created at: March 9, 2026, 3:17 p.m.