area: be calculated for flat spape

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents zone
Weight: 0.71
, region
Weight: 0.65
, route
Weight: 0.63
, landmark
Weight: 0.61
Siblings south carolina
Weight: 0.71
, national park
Weight: 0.70
, south dakota
Weight: 0.70
, north carolina
Weight: 0.69
, north dakota
Weight: 0.69

Related properties

Property Similarity
be calculated for flat spape 1.00
be calculated for flat shapes 0.92
be calculated for spape 0.90
be calculated 0.89
is flat 0.87
be calculated for shapes 0.82

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

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(south dakota, is flat)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(south dakota, is flat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(south dakota, is flat)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(area, be calculated for flat spape)

Similarity expansion

0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(area, be calculated)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(area, be calculated for flat shapes)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(area, be calculated for spape)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(area, be calculated)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(area, be calculated for flat shapes)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(area, be calculated for shapes)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(area, be calculated for spape)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(area, be calculated for flat shapes)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(area, be calculated)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(area, be calculated for spape)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(area, be calculated for shapes)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated for spape)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat shapes)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(area, be calculated for shapes)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated for shapes)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(area, be calculated for flat spape)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(area, be calculated for flat spape) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(south dakota, is flat)