asset: has shape split

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents loan
Weight: 0.68
, option
Weight: 0.61
, subject
Weight: 0.60
, customer
Weight: 0.59
Siblings experience
Weight: 0.64
, talent
Weight: 0.64
, good will
Weight: 0.57
, domain
Weight: 0.55
, farmland
Weight: 0.54

Related properties

Property Similarity
has shape split 1.00
be split between husband 0.80
be split up in divorce 0.79
be split in divorce 0.79
be split after divorce 0.79
has shape base 0.76
be actually divided in groups 0.76
be divided in marriage 0.76
be divided in 16-month marriage 0.76
be divided in divorce 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(experience, be actually divided in groups)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.21
Remarkable(experience, be actually divided in groups)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(experience, be actually divided in groups)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(asset, has shape split)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(asset, be split up in divorce)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(asset, be split after divorce)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(asset, be split in divorce)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Salient(asset, be divided in divorce)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(asset, be split up in divorce)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(asset, be split between husband)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(asset, be split after divorce)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(asset, be split in divorce)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Remarkable(asset, be divided in divorce)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(asset, be divided in marriage)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(asset, be split up in divorce)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Plausible(asset, be divided in divorce)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(asset, be divided in 16-month marriage)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(asset, be split after divorce)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(asset, be split in divorce)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(asset, be divided in marriage)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(asset, be split up in divorce)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(asset, be split between husband)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(asset, be split between husband)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(asset, be split between husband)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(asset, be split after divorce)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asset, be split in divorce)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(asset, be divided in divorce)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(asset, be divided in 16-month marriage)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(asset, be divided in marriage)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(asset, be divided in marriage)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(asset, be divided in 16-month marriage)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(asset, be divided in 16-month marriage)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(asset, has shape split)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(asset, has shape split)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(asset, has shape split)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(experience, be actually divided in groups)