botanist: were important on voyage

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents scientist
Weight: 0.61
, biologist
Weight: 0.53
, plant
Weight: 0.52
, researcher
Weight: 0.51
Siblings geneticist
Weight: 0.36
, geologist
Weight: 0.35
, astronomer
Weight: 0.35
, archaeologist
Weight: 0.35
, physicist
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
were important on voyage 1.00
were important on voyage cook 0.93
were important on voyage of james 0.90
were important on voyage of james cook 0.86

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(botanist, were important on voyage)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(botanist, were important on voyage cook)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage cook)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(botanist, were important on voyage of james)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(botanist, were important on voyage of james cook)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage cook)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage of james cook)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage of james)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(botanist, were important on voyage cook)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage of james cook)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage of james)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(botanist, were important on voyage of james)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(botanist, were important on voyage of james cook)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(botanist, were important on voyage)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(botanist, were important on voyage) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(botanist, were important on voyage)