both: were natural sciences based on models

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents place
Weight: 0.61
, option
Weight: 0.53
, record
Weight: 0.51
, thing
Weight: 0.50
, time
Weight: 0.49
Siblings two
Weight: 0.34
, overall
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
were natural sciences based on models 1.00
were natural sciences based on models of study 0.98
were natural sciences based on scientific models 0.98
were natural sciences based on scientific models of study 0.96
were natural sciences based on research 0.95

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

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Salient(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models of study)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models of study)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models of study)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models of study)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models of study)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on scientific models)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(both, were natural sciences based on research)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on models of study)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models of study)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models of study)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on research)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on research)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(both, were natural sciences based on research)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(both, were natural sciences based on models)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(both, were natural sciences based on models) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(both, were natural sciences based on models)