analyst: has quality wrong

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents expert
Weight: 0.76
, third party
Weight: 0.55
, employee
Weight: 0.55
, researcher
Weight: 0.54
Siblings economist
Weight: 0.37
, scientist
Weight: 0.36
, professor
Weight: 0.36
, scholar
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality wrong 1.00
be wrong about china 0.80
be wrong about apple 0.79

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

0.29
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
Plausible(expert, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(analyst, has quality wrong)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(expert, has quality wrong)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.56
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(expert, has quality wrong)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
Plausible(expert, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(analyst, has quality wrong)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Salient(analyst, has quality wrong)

Similarity expansion

0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(analyst, be wrong about apple)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(analyst, be wrong about china)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.35
Salient(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(analyst, be wrong about apple)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(analyst, be wrong about apple)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(analyst, be wrong about apple)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.35
Salient(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Salient(analyst, be wrong about china)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(analyst, be wrong about china)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(analyst, be wrong about china)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.35
Salient(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(analyst, has quality wrong)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(analyst, has quality wrong)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(expert, has quality wrong)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(analyst, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(expert, has quality wrong)