aetna: has quality worth

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents company
Weight: 0.53
, plan
Weight: 0.52
, client
Weight: 0.48
, corporation
Weight: 0.45
, giant
Weight: 0.45
Siblings software company
Weight: 0.28
, blueprint
Weight: 0.28
, oil company
Weight: 0.27
, advertising agency
Weight: 0.27
, conglomerate
Weight: 0.27

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality worth 1.00
has quality good 0.85

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

0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(aetna, has quality worth)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(plan, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(software company, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(blueprint, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(aetna, has quality worth)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(blueprint, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(blueprint, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(software company, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(software company, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(aetna, has quality worth)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Salient(aetna, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(aetna, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(aetna, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(aetna, has quality worth)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(blueprint, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(software company, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(aetna, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)