algorithm: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents method
Weight: 0.69
, concept
Weight: 0.64
, computer program
Weight: 0.62
, search engine
Weight: 0.61
Siblings neural network
Weight: 0.75
, blowfish
Weight: 0.59
, regression
Weight: 0.57
, triangulation
Weight: 0.54
, hash table
Weight: 0.54

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
has quality system 0.82
has quality worth 0.82
has quality definition 0.75

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

0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(computer program, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(search engine, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(computer program, has quality definition)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(computer program, has quality system)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality system)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(search engine, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality definition)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(search engine, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality system)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality definition)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(hash table, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(regression, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(neural network, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(neural network, has quality better)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(computer program, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(search engine, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(computer program, has quality definition)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(computer program, has quality system)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(regression, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(regression, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(triangulation, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(triangulation, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(neural network, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(neural network, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.24
Remarkable(hash table, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(hash table, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.78
Remarkable(neural network, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(neural network, has quality better)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(algorithm, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality worth)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(algorithm, has quality worth)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(algorithm, has quality worth)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality worth)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality system)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(search engine, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality definition)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(hash table, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(regression, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(neural network, has quality better)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(neural network, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(triangulation, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(search engine, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality system)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(algorithm, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality definition)