banking: has quality system

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents financial institution
Weight: 0.70
, market
Weight: 0.67
, institution
Weight: 0.66
, sector
Weight: 0.65
, system
Weight: 0.64
Siblings banking industry
Weight: 0.38
, mortgage lender
Weight: 0.38
, bank
Weight: 0.37
, bank statement
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality system 1.00
has quality better 0.84
has quality good 0.84
has quality worth 0.77

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

0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(system, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(banking, has quality system)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(market, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(banking, has quality system)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(sector, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(banking, has quality system)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(system, has quality system)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(sector, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(market, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.14
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(sector, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(market, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.13
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(system, has quality system)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(bank, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(system, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality system)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(market, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality system)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(sector, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality system)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(bank, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(bank, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Salient(banking, has quality system)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality better)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality good)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality worth)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.69
Salient(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(banking, has quality better)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.22
Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(banking, has quality worth)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.69
Salient(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(banking, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
Salient(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(banking, has quality worth)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality worth)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality better)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.22
Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(banking, has quality better)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.22
Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(banking, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Salient(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(banking, has quality system)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(system, has quality system)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(sector, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(market, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.17
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(bank, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.22
Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(system, has quality system)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.22
Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(sector, has quality good)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.22
Typical(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(market, has quality good)