alberta: was in debt

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents province
Weight: 0.65
, canada
Weight: 0.62
, area
Weight: 0.57
, place
Weight: 0.55
, location
Weight: 0.53
Siblings ontario
Weight: 0.37
, alaska
Weight: 0.35
, quebec
Weight: 0.35
, winnipeg
Weight: 0.34
, vancouver
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
was in debt 1.00
was in debt in 1930 1.00
be in debt 0.98
was in big debt 0.96
was in big debt in 1930 0.95

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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(ontario, be in debt)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(ontario, be in debt)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(ontario, be in debt)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Salient(alberta, was in debt)

Similarity expansion

0.82
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(alberta, was in debt in 1930)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Salient(alberta, was in debt in 1930)
0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(alberta, was in debt in 1930)
0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Plausible(alberta, was in big debt in 1930)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(alberta, was in big debt)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(alberta, was in big debt in 1930)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Salient(alberta, was in big debt in 1930)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(alberta, be in debt)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(alberta, was in debt in 1930)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(alberta, was in big debt)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(alberta, be in debt)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(alberta, be in debt)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(alberta, was in big debt)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(alberta, was in big debt in 1930)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(alberta, be in debt)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(alberta, was in big debt)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(alberta, was in debt)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(alberta, was in debt)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(ontario, be in debt)