Triple
T4605122
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. |
E100412
|
entity |
| Predicate | dissentingView |
P39427
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Liability should be based on whether the defendant’s act was a substantial factor in producing the injury, not on foreseeability of the particular plaintiff |
—
|
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: Liability should be based on whether the defendant’s act was a substantial factor in producing the injury, not on foreseeability of the particular plaintiff | Statement: [Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., dissentingView, Liability should be based on whether the defendant’s act was a substantial factor in producing the injury, not on foreseeability of the particular plaintiff]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: dissentingView Context triple: [Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., dissentingView, Liability should be based on whether the defendant’s act was a substantial factor in producing the injury, not on foreseeability of the particular plaintiff]
-
A.
dissentingJustice
Indicates that a particular justice disagrees with the majority opinion or decision in a legal case.
-
B.
dissentingOpinionConcern
Indicates that one party holds a differing or opposing view and expresses concern or disagreement regarding another party’s position, decision, or statement.
-
C.
standardDiscussedInDissent
chosen
Indicates that a particular legal standard is examined or addressed within the dissenting opinion of a judicial decision.
-
D.
mayDissentOn
Indicates that an entity has the option or permission to formally disagree with or oppose another entity’s decision, opinion, or action.
-
E.
hasDissentingJustice
Indicates that within a judicial decision or ruling, there exists at least one justice who formally disagrees with the majority opinion.
- 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_69bd43cce1e08190a07d53af6a9b6c24 |
completed | March 20, 2026, 12:55 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69bd5999f9c88190a43309573df61159 |
completed | March 20, 2026, 2:28 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69bd522e2d5c8190937d0b5574f78f99 |
completed | March 20, 2026, 1:57 p.m. |
Created at: March 20, 2026, 1:12 p.m.