Triple
T904107
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | John G. Roberts Jr. |
E19507
|
entity |
| Predicate | legalPhilosophy |
P20219
|
FINISHED |
| Object | judicial minimalism (often associated) |
—
|
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: judicial minimalism (often associated) | Statement: [John G. Roberts Jr., legalPhilosophy, judicial minimalism (often associated)]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: legalPhilosophy Context triple: [John G. Roberts Jr., legalPhilosophy, judicial minimalism (often associated)]
-
A.
legalDoctrine
Indicates that one legal principle, rule, or theory is being applied, referenced, or relied upon as an authoritative basis for interpreting or deciding a legal issue.
-
B.
lawReview
Indicates a relationship where an entity is associated with a law review, typically as its subject, source, or venue of publication within legal scholarship.
-
C.
law
Indicates that one entity establishes, embodies, or enforces a rule or system of rules governing the behavior or relations of another entity.
-
D.
lawJournal
Indicates a relationship where a work is published in, associated with, or appears within a specific law journal.
-
E.
legalDoctrineChallenged
Indicates that a particular legal doctrine is being disputed, questioned, or contested, typically through litigation or formal legal argument.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (4 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_69a4939e889c8190ac148b3ac1a7f90b |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:29 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69a4ad58334881908df191140b786780 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 9:19 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69a4aa98caec8190bbcc38320090f058 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 9:07 p.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69a4ab60fea8819098ce3269181897d1 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 9:10 p.m. |
Created at: March 1, 2026, 7:39 p.m.