australia: be considered developed country

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents south korea
Weight: 0.70
, malaysia
Weight: 0.68
, south africa
Weight: 0.66
, european union
Weight: 0.66
, south america
Weight: 0.65
Siblings canada
Weight: 0.38
, india
Weight: 0.37
, latin america
Weight: 0.37
, germany
Weight: 0.36
, europe
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
be considered developed country 1.00
be considered country 0.90
be considered part of world 0.87
be considered part of western world 0.83
be called country 0.82
be known as country 0.82
be considered continent 0.80
is one country 0.78
is country 0.78
is chogm country 0.78

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

0.29
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(malaysia, be considered country)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(australia, be considered developed country)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(malaysia, is country)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(australia, be considered developed country)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(malaysia, be considered country)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(malaysia, is country)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(malaysia, be considered country)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(malaysia, is country)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(india, be called country)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(canada, be considered country)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(europe, be considered continent)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(india, is country)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Remarkable(germany, is country)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Remarkable(canada, is country)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(malaysia, be considered country)
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(malaysia, is country)
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(canada, be considered country)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(canada, be considered country)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(europe, be considered continent)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(europe, be considered continent)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(india, be called country)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(india, be called country)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 1.00
Remarkable(canada, is country)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(canada, is country)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 1.00
Remarkable(germany, is country)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(germany, is country)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.98
Remarkable(india, is country)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(india, is country)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(australia, be considered developed country)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(australia, be considered country)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(australia, is country)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(australia, be considered country)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(australia, be considered country)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered country)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(australia, is country)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(australia, is country)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Remarkable(australia, is country)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(australia, be considered developed country)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(malaysia, be considered country)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(malaysia, is country)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(europe, be considered continent)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(germany, is country)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Typical(india, is country)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(canada, is country)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(india, be called country)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(canada, be considered country)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(malaysia, be considered country)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(australia, be considered developed country)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(malaysia, is country)