baltimore: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents new york
Weight: 0.62
, port
Weight: 0.61
, location
Weight: 0.57
, town
Weight: 0.57
, time
Weight: 0.57
Siblings maryland
Weight: 0.62
, new york city
Weight: 0.37
, philadelphia
Weight: 0.36
, miami
Weight: 0.36
, washington
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
is poor 0.78
is bad city 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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(miami, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(philadelphia, is poor)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(miami, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(miami, has quality bad)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(philadelphia, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(philadelphia, is poor)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Salient(baltimore, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(baltimore, is bad city)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.55
Salient(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Salient(baltimore, is bad city)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, is bad city)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(baltimore, is bad city)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(baltimore, is poor)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, is poor)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(baltimore, is poor)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
Salient(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(baltimore, is poor)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.55
Salient(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(baltimore, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(miami, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(baltimore, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(philadelphia, is poor)