agent: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents biological agent
Weight: 0.76
, real estate agent
Weight: 0.65
, source
Weight: 0.64
, contractor
Weight: 0.62
Siblings travel agent
Weight: 0.75
, representative
Weight: 0.67
, beta blocker
Weight: 0.65
, solicitor
Weight: 0.63
, attorney
Weight: 0.62

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality joke 0.79
have bad reputation 0.77
has quality questions 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: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(source, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(source, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(contractor, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(contractor, have bad reputation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(real estate agent, have bad reputation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(source, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(contractor, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(source, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(real estate agent, have bad reputation)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(contractor, have bad reputation)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(real estate agent, have bad reputation)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(source, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(contractor, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have bad reputation)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(source, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(solicitor, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(attorney, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(solicitor, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(representative, has quality questions)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(source, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(agent, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(source, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(agent, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(contractor, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(agent, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(contractor, have bad reputation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(agent, has quality good)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(real estate agent, have bad reputation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(agent, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(solicitor, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(solicitor, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(attorney, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(attorney, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(solicitor, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(solicitor, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(representative, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(representative, has quality questions)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(agent, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(agent, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(real estate agent, have bad reputation)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(source, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(contractor, has quality bad)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(source, has quality bad)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(contractor, have bad reputation)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(representative, has quality questions)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(solicitor, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(attorney, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(solicitor, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(source, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(contractor, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(source, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(real estate agent, have bad reputation)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(agent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(contractor, have bad reputation)