Triple
T7486370
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce |
E176891
|
entity |
| Predicate | fullName |
P16
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce |
E176891
|
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: Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce | Statement: [Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, fullName, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce Context triple: [Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, fullName, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce]
-
A.
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce
chosen
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce was a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld restrictions on corporate independent political expenditures under the First Amendment until it was later overturned by Citizens United.
-
B.
Austin v. United States
Austin v. United States is a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that held certain civil forfeitures constitute punishment and are therefore subject to the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause.
-
C.
Michigan v. Tucker
Michigan v. Tucker is a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the exclusionary rule’s application to statements obtained without full Miranda warnings, holding that derivative evidence from such statements could still be admissible.
-
D.
Branch v. Texas
Branch v. Texas is a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing the constitutionality and application of the death penalty in the wake of the landmark Furman v. Georgia decision.
-
E.
Alexander v. Sandoval
Alexander v. Sandoval is a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held there is no private right of action to enforce disparate-impact regulations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
- 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_69c69f24ac508190bb98fe927c0bd065 |
completed | March 27, 2026, 3:15 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69c6f556955c8190bf014a065e04c5d8 |
completed | March 27, 2026, 9:23 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69c83c68bcf081908a2c280152d887f0 |
completed | March 28, 2026, 8:39 p.m. |
Created at: March 27, 2026, 3:42 p.m.