access: is hard

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents security system
Weight: 0.61
, location
Weight: 0.59
, consideration
Weight: 0.59
, service
Weight: 0.59
Siblings easement
Weight: 0.59
, key
Weight: 0.57
, egress
Weight: 0.40
, internet service provider
Weight: 0.35
, escort service
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
is hard 1.00
tend harder 0.77
be denied to hard drive 0.77
is easy 0.76

Priors about this statement

Cues

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Joint Necessity Sufficiency Implication Entailment Contradiction Entropy

Evidence

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(service, tend harder) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(access, is hard)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(service, tend harder)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(service, tend harder)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(service, tend harder) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(access, is hard)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(access, is hard)

Similarity expansion

0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(access, be denied to hard drive)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Salient(access, be denied to hard drive)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(access, be denied to hard drive)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(access, be denied to hard drive)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(access, is hard)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(access, is hard)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, tend harder)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(access, is hard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, tend harder)