article: be more popular than ones made of metals

Related concepts

Parents	news article Weight: 0.86 , report Weight: 0.73 , item Weight: 0.66 , story Weight: 0.64
Siblings	obituary Weight: 0.78 , manuscript Weight: 0.65 , diary Weight: 0.63 , paragraph Weight: 0.63 , fountain pen Weight: 0.62

Related properties

Property	Similarity
be more popular than ones made of metals	1.00
be more popular than ones made	0.89
be more popular than ones	0.87
be less rare than ones	0.83
be less rare than common ones	0.81
have more expensive than in 1933 today	0.80
get more expensive	0.79
were expensive in times	0.77
be much more costly today	0.76
were expensive in early times	0.76

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.52

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.91

Plausible(item, have more expensive than in 1933 today) ⋁

Evidence: 0.21

¬ Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(item, be much more costly today) ⋁

Evidence: 0.21

¬ Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Plausible(item, be much more costly today)

0.03

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Plausible(item, have more expensive than in 1933 today)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.16

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Remarkable(item, have more expensive than in 1933 today)

0.10

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Remarkable(item, be much more costly today)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Remarkable(manuscript, were expensive in early times)

0.04

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Remarkable(manuscript, were expensive in times)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.91

Plausible(item, have more expensive than in 1933 today) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

0.32

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(item, be much more costly today) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.39

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

Remarkable(manuscript, were expensive in times) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Plausible(manuscript, were expensive in times)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

Remarkable(manuscript, were expensive in early times) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Plausible(manuscript, were expensive in early times)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Salient(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

Similarity expansion

0.71

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.93

Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made)

0.70

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.93

Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.67

Salient(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Salient(article, be more popular than ones made)

0.56

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.67

Salient(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Salient(article, be more popular than ones)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.21

Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

¬ Typical(article, be more popular than ones made)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made)

0.53

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.21

Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.36

¬ Typical(article, be more popular than ones)

0.53

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Plausible(article, be more popular than ones)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

Salient(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.21

¬ Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.41

Plausible(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.21

¬ Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.16

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.64

¬ Typical(item, be much more costly today)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.12
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.94

¬ Typical(item, have more expensive than in 1933 today)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.02

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.85

¬ Typical(manuscript, were expensive in times)

0.01

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.10
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

¬ Typical(manuscript, were expensive in early times)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.18

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.21

Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.64

¬ Typical(item, be much more costly today)

0.10

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.21

Typical(article, be more popular than ones made of metals) ⋁

Evidence: 0.94

¬ Typical(item, have more expensive than in 1933 today)