boycott: were effective solution to problem of taxes

Related concepts

Parents	action Weight: 0.59 , method Weight: 0.56 , movement Weight: 0.56 , activity Weight: 0.54 , decision Weight: 0.52
Siblings	strike Weight: 0.33 , ban Weight: 0.32 , injunction Weight: 0.32 , lawsuit Weight: 0.31 , recall Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property	Similarity
were effective solution to problem of taxes	1.00
were effective solution to problem	0.93
is effective	0.79
were effective	0.79

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.49

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.37

Plausible(method, is effective) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.05

Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.37

¬ Plausible(method, is effective)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.37

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.20

¬ Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.94

¬ Remarkable(method, is effective)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.37

Plausible(method, is effective) ⋁

Evidence: 0.20

Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.05

¬ Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.05

Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.10

¬ Salient(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes)

Similarity expansion

0.70

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.05

Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.13

¬ Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem)

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.10

Salient(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.17

¬ Salient(boycott, were effective solution to problem)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.20

Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.23

¬ Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem)

0.60

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.11

Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.28

¬ Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.20

Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Remarkable(boycott, were effective)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.20

Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Remarkable(boycott, is effective)

0.31

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.05

Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Plausible(boycott, is effective)

0.30

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.10

Salient(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Salient(boycott, is effective)

0.30

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.11

Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Typical(boycott, is effective)

0.28

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.05

Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Plausible(boycott, were effective)

0.27

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.10

Salient(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Salient(boycott, were effective)

0.27

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.11

Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.68

¬ Typical(boycott, were effective)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.10

Salient(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.20

¬ Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.05

Plausible(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.20

¬ Remarkable(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.14

¬ Typical(method, is effective)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.33

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.11

Typical(boycott, were effective solution to problem of taxes) ⋁

Evidence: 0.14

¬ Typical(method, is effective)