Triple

T9607479
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action) E232007 entity
Predicate criticizes P437 FINISHED
Object Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action is a Supreme Court opinion emphasizing judicial restraint and the legitimacy of voter decisions to prohibit race-based affirmative action policies in public education.
E809990 NE FINISHED

How this triple was built (4 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: Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action | Statement: [Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action), criticizes, Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
Context triple: [Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action), criticizes, Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action]
  • A. Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action)
    Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action) is Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s powerful Supreme Court dissent criticizing a Michigan constitutional amendment that banned race-conscious admissions policies in public universities.
  • B. Arizona v. Johnson
    Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
  • C. United States v. Virginia (1996) majority opinion
    The United States v. Virginia (1996) majority opinion is a landmark Supreme Court decision, authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that struck down the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy as unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.
  • D. Grutter v. Bollinger
    Grutter v. Bollinger is a landmark 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the limited use of race as one factor in holistic law school admissions to promote educational diversity.
  • E. Bucklew v. Precythe
    Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
  • F. None of above. chosen
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NEDg Description generation gpt-5.1
Instruction
Generate a one-sentence description of the target entity. 
You are given a context triple in the form (subject, predicate, object), where the object is the target entity. 
# Instructions
Use the triple to infer relevant information about the entity. Describe the entity based on what is most defining, well-known. 
Avoid repeating the information from the triple, unless really essential.
# Response Format
Return only the sentence: "Description: [one-sentence description of the target entity]"
Input
Entity: Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
Triple: [Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action), criticizes, Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action]
Generated description
Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action is a Supreme Court opinion emphasizing judicial restraint and the legitimacy of voter decisions to prohibit race-based affirmative action policies in public education.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
Target entity description: Chief Justice John Roberts’s concurrence in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action is a Supreme Court opinion emphasizing judicial restraint and the legitimacy of voter decisions to prohibit race-based affirmative action policies in public education.
  • A. Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action)
    Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action) is Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s powerful Supreme Court dissent criticizing a Michigan constitutional amendment that banned race-conscious admissions policies in public universities.
  • B. Arizona v. Johnson
    Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
  • C. United States v. Virginia (1996) majority opinion
    The United States v. Virginia (1996) majority opinion is a landmark Supreme Court decision, authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that struck down the Virginia Military Institute’s male-only admissions policy as unconstitutional sex discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause.
  • D. Grutter v. Bollinger
    Grutter v. Bollinger is a landmark 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the limited use of race as one factor in holistic law school admissions to promote educational diversity.
  • E. Bucklew v. Precythe
    Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
  • F. None of above. chosen

Provenance (5 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_69ca8485a90c819094fe40b42fde9d70 completed March 30, 2026, 2:11 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69cd9a62372881908bf21be91e7285fb completed April 1, 2026, 10:21 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69d17942504481908e7147a0f56bdf96 completed April 4, 2026, 8:49 p.m.
NEDg Description generation batch_69d17a27596081909c6a2ec486480ce1 completed April 4, 2026, 8:52 p.m.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) batch_69d17af1d1b48190b6f8350edfa4f5ef completed April 4, 2026, 8:56 p.m.
Created at: March 30, 2026, 8:08 p.m.