Triple

T4671814
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject clear and present danger test E103580 entity
Predicate developedInCase P17594 FINISHED
Object Schenck v. United States E32820 NE 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: Schenck v. United States | Statement: [clear and present danger test, developedInCase, Schenck v. United States]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Schenck v. United States
Context triple: [clear and present danger test, developedInCase, Schenck v. United States]
  • A. Schenck v. United States chosen
    Schenck v. United States is a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the “clear and present danger” test, allowing the government to restrict speech during wartime.
  • B. Schenck
    Schenck is a surname of Germanic origin borne by various notable individuals in fields such as entertainment, law, and public service.
  • C. Debs v. United States
    Debs v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case in which socialist leader Eugene V. Debs’s conviction for antiwar speech was upheld, reinforcing broad limits on free speech during wartime.
  • D. Gitlow v. New York
    Gitlow v. New York is a 1925 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked a major step in applying First Amendment free speech protections to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • E. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire
    Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire is a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the "fighting words" doctrine, holding that certain personally abusive epithets are not protected by the First Amendment.
  • F. None of above.
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

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_69bd43dda32c8190938b37744ca270fc completed March 20, 2026, 12:55 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69bd63506090819083ff8271adc5ef75 completed March 20, 2026, 3:10 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69be039538048190b4075daf47355cee completed March 21, 2026, 2:33 a.m.
Created at: March 20, 2026, 1:15 p.m.