apprentice: get treated badly

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents student
Weight: 0.57
, person
Weight: 0.56
, show
Weight: 0.54
, program
Weight: 0.53
Siblings intern
Weight: 0.33
, mentor
Weight: 0.32
, janitor
Weight: 0.32
, trainer
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
get treated badly 1.00
is treated badly 0.99
get treated 0.89
is treated 0.84

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

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(intern, is treated badly)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(intern, get treated badly)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(intern, get treated)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(intern, is treated)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(intern, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(intern, get treated badly)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(intern, is treated badly)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(intern, is treated badly)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(intern, get treated)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(intern, get treated)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(intern, is treated)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(intern, is treated)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(apprentice, get treated badly)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(apprentice, get treated)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(apprentice, is treated)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(apprentice, is treated badly)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, is treated badly)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(apprentice, get treated)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(apprentice, is treated badly)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(apprentice, is treated badly)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(apprentice, is treated)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(apprentice, get treated)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Salient(apprentice, is treated)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, is treated)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(apprentice, get treated badly)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(intern, get treated)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(intern, is treated)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(intern, get treated badly)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(apprentice, get treated badly)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(intern, is treated badly)