breaking: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents damage
Weight: 0.59
, crime
Weight: 0.57
, charge
Weight: 0.56
, matter
Weight: 0.52
, problem
Weight: 0.51
Siblings stealing
Weight: 0.31
, cracking
Weight: 0.31
, hacking
Weight: 0.31
, tear
Weight: 0.31
, breach
Weight: 0.30

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality better 0.94
has quality change 0.86
is great 0.81
has quality news 0.79
be considered good 0.77
is good show 0.76
is best 0.76

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

0.34
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(crime, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(crime, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(crime, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(stealing, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(stealing, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(hacking, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(cracking, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(cracking, has quality change)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(cracking, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(hacking, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(breach, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(crime, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(breaking, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
Remarkable(stealing, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Plausible(stealing, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(cracking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(cracking, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(hacking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(hacking, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(stealing, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(stealing, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(breach, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(breach, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(cracking, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(cracking, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(hacking, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(hacking, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(cracking, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(cracking, has quality change)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(breaking, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(breaking, has quality bad)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(breaking, has quality better)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality bad)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality better)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(breaking, has quality bad)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality change)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(breaking, has quality change)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(breaking, has quality better)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(breaking, has quality change)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(breaking, is great)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(breaking, has quality news)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality news)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality bad)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality better)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(breaking, has quality news)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(breaking, be considered good)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(breaking, is good show)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(breaking, is great)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(breaking, is best)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(breaking, be considered good)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(breaking, is great)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(breaking, be considered good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is great)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(breaking, is good show)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(breaking, is best)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(breaking, is good show)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(breaking, is best)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality change)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(breaking, be considered good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is good show)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is best)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality news)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(breaking, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(crime, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(stealing, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(stealing, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(cracking, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(cracking, has quality change)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(hacking, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(breach, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(cracking, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(hacking, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(crime, has quality bad)