brand: cost less

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents name
Weight: 0.68
, concept
Weight: 0.64
, industry
Weight: 0.62
, symbol
Weight: 0.62
Siblings label
Weight: 0.70
, premium
Weight: 0.68
, hermes
Weight: 0.67
, chevrolet
Weight: 0.66
, pepsi
Weight: 0.66

Related properties

Property Similarity
cost less 1.00
is expensive 0.78

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(label, is expensive)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(chevrolet, is expensive)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(hermes, is expensive)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(hermes, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(hermes, is expensive)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(chevrolet, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(chevrolet, is expensive)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(label, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(label, is expensive)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Salient(brand, cost less)

Similarity expansion

0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(brand, is expensive)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(brand, is expensive)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.60
Salient(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(brand, is expensive)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(brand, is expensive)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Salient(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(brand, cost less)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(hermes, is expensive)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chevrolet, is expensive)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(brand, cost less) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(label, is expensive)