breaking: is illegal

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
is illegal 1.00
be for copyright illegal 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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(hacking, is illegal)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(stealing, is illegal)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(stealing, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(stealing, is illegal)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(hacking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Plausible(hacking, is illegal)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(breaking, is illegal)

Similarity expansion

0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(breaking, be for copyright illegal)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(breaking, be for copyright illegal)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(breaking, be for copyright illegal)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(breaking, be for copyright illegal)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is illegal)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(breaking, is illegal)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(stealing, is illegal)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(breaking, is illegal) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(hacking, is illegal)