apathy: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents symptom
Weight: 0.69
, problem
Weight: 0.60
, mental health problem
Weight: 0.58
, reason
Weight: 0.54
, issue
Weight: 0.54
Siblings intolerance
Weight: 0.34
, lack
Weight: 0.34
, laziness
Weight: 0.34
, amnesia
Weight: 0.34
, tiredness
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
is quality 0.91
is best quality 0.89
has quality worse 0.84
feel good 0.80
has quality definition 0.76
was bad 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

0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(symptom, has quality worse) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(apathy, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(symptom, has quality worse)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(symptom, has quality worse)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(amnesia, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(laziness, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(lack, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(intolerance, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(laziness, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(intolerance, is quality)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(intolerance, is best quality)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(tiredness, feel good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(laziness, feel good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(intolerance, was bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(symptom, has quality worse) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(apathy, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.60
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(amnesia, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(amnesia, has quality good)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(laziness, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(laziness, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(laziness, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(laziness, has quality bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
Remarkable(intolerance, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(intolerance, is quality)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(intolerance, is best quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(intolerance, is best quality)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(intolerance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(intolerance, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(laziness, feel good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(laziness, feel good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(tiredness, feel good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(tiredness, feel good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(lack, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(lack, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(intolerance, was bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(intolerance, was bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Salient(apathy, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.00
Salient(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Salient(apathy, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(apathy, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
Typical(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(apathy, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.00
Salient(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(apathy, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(symptom, has quality worse)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(laziness, has quality good)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(amnesia, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(laziness, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(intolerance, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(lack, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(intolerance, is quality)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(intolerance, is best quality)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(laziness, feel good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(tiredness, feel good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(intolerance, was bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.11
Typical(apathy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(symptom, has quality worse)