accountant: use computers

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents person
Weight: 0.63
, specialist
Weight: 0.63
, financial institution
Weight: 0.63
, department
Weight: 0.60
, professional
Weight: 0.59
Siblings cpa
Weight: 0.53
, lawyer
Weight: 0.35
, stockbroker
Weight: 0.35
, banker
Weight: 0.34
, paralegal
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
use computers 1.00
use databases 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(banker, use computers)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, use computers)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Plausible(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(banker, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(banker, use computers)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Plausible(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(lawyer, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(lawyer, use computers)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Plausible(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(accountant, use computers)

Similarity expansion

0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(accountant, use databases)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(accountant, use databases)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.51
Plausible(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(accountant, use databases)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(accountant, use databases)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(accountant, use computers)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Plausible(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(accountant, use computers)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(banker, use computers)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(accountant, use computers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(lawyer, use computers)