Triple

T9309065
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Cutter E223962 entity
Predicate partyTo P1790 FINISHED
Object Cutter v. Wilkinson E43462 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: Cutter v. Wilkinson | Statement: [Cutter, partyTo, Cutter v. Wilkinson]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Cutter v. Wilkinson
Context triple: [Cutter, partyTo, Cutter v. Wilkinson]
  • A. Cutter v. Wilkinson chosen
    Cutter v. Wilkinson is a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act as applied to the religious rights of prison inmates.
  • B. Crawford v. Washington
    Crawford v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reshaped Confrontation Clause jurisprudence by holding that testimonial hearsay is inadmissible against a criminal defendant unless the witness is unavailable and there was a prior opportunity for cross-examination.
  • C. Washington v. Davis
    Washington v. Davis is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that held laws or policies with a racially disproportionate impact do not violate the Equal Protection Clause absent proof of discriminatory intent.
  • D. Blakely v. Washington
    Blakely v. Washington is a landmark 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that applied the Apprendi rule to state sentencing guidelines, holding that any fact increasing a defendant’s sentence beyond the statutory maximum must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • E. Briggs v. Elliott
    Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
  • 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_69ca8424d0f08190831e2e93c6533aeb completed March 30, 2026, 2:09 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69cd1daba67c819081d53545d67ef127 completed April 1, 2026, 1:29 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69d0c784f24481909af5f0daa1b8333a completed April 4, 2026, 8:10 a.m.
Created at: March 30, 2026, 7:37 p.m.