acquisition: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents development
Weight: 0.69
, share
Weight: 0.64
, agreement
Weight: 0.63
, business activity
Weight: 0.63
Siblings deal
Weight: 0.65
, purchase
Weight: 0.62
, takeover
Weight: 0.50
, merger
Weight: 0.36
, partnership
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality better 0.94
has quality price 0.80
be good for business 0.80
has quality news 0.79
be good in business 0.79
be bad for environment 0.77
be better for business 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

0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(business activity, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(agreement, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(share, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(share, has quality price) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(development, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(share, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(agreement, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(business activity, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(development, be bad for environment)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(share, has quality price)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Remarkable(development, be bad for environment)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(agreement, has quality good)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(share, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(share, has quality price)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(merger, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(takeover, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(deal, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(merger, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(takeover, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(partnership, be better for business)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(partnership, be good for business)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(partnership, be good in business)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(merger, has quality news)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(agreement, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(share, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(business activity, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(share, has quality price) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(development, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(partnership, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(takeover, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(takeover, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(merger, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(merger, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality better)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(deal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(deal, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(takeover, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(takeover, has quality bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(merger, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(merger, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(merger, has quality news) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(merger, has quality news)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(partnership, be good in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(partnership, be good in business)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(partnership, be good for business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(partnership, be good for business)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(partnership, be better for business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(partnership, be better for business)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(acquisition, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(acquisition, has quality bad)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality bad)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(share, has quality price)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(share, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(development, be bad for environment)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(agreement, has quality good)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(business activity, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(merger, has quality news)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(takeover, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(merger, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(merger, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(takeover, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(deal, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(partnership, be good in business)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(partnership, be better for business)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(partnership, be good for business)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(share, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(agreement, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(share, has quality price)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(business activity, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(development, be bad for environment)