binding: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents agreement
Weight: 0.59
, document
Weight: 0.59
, process
Weight: 0.58
, matter
Weight: 0.58
Siblings phagocytosis
Weight: 0.32
, negotiable instrument
Weight: 0.32
, hydrolysis
Weight: 0.32
, compromise
Weight: 0.31
, declaration
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
is quality 0.87
has quality air 0.80
has quality questions 0.75

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

0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(agreement, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(binding, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(binding, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(agreement, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(process, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(agreement, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(process, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(compromise, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(phagocytosis, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(compromise, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(agreement, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(binding, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(binding, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
Remarkable(compromise, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(compromise, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
Remarkable(phagocytosis, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(phagocytosis, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(compromise, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(compromise, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(binding, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(binding, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(agreement, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(compromise, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(phagocytosis, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(compromise, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(agreement, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(binding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)