brush: has physical part tool

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents utensil
Weight: 0.59
, tool
Weight: 0.58
, obstacle
Weight: 0.57
, cover
Weight: 0.56
Siblings toilet brush
Weight: 0.79
, wooden spoon
Weight: 0.33
, spoon
Weight: 0.33
, razor blade
Weight: 0.33
, cooking utensil
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has physical part tool 1.00
be called tool 0.92
has physical part quick 0.80

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

0.43
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(tool, be called tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(brush, has physical part tool)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(tool, be called tool)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(tool, be called tool)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(tool, be called tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(brush, has physical part tool)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Salient(brush, has physical part tool)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(brush, has physical part quick)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.52
Salient(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Salient(brush, has physical part quick)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(brush, has physical part quick)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.36
Typical(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(brush, has physical part quick)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Salient(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has physical part tool)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(brush, has physical part tool)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(tool, be called tool)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.36
Typical(brush, has physical part tool) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(tool, be called tool)