brush: has quality better

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 quality better 1.00
has quality good 0.94
has quality bad 0.90
has quality use 0.87
has quality worth 0.83
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

0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(utensil, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(utensil, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(tool, is best) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(utensil, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(tool, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(utensil, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(utensil, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(tool, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(utensil, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(utensil, has quality use)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(tool, has quality worth)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(utensil, has quality worth)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(tool, is best)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(utensil, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(tool, has quality good)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(tool, is best)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(utensil, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(utensil, has quality use)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(utensil, has quality worth)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(tool, has quality worth)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(wooden spoon, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(cooking utensil, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(spoon, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(razor blade, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(spoon, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(cooking utensil, has quality use)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(utensil, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(utensil, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(utensil, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(utensil, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(tool, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(tool, is best) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality better)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(spoon, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(spoon, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
Remarkable(wooden spoon, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(wooden spoon, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(cooking utensil, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Plausible(cooking utensil, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(cooking utensil, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(cooking utensil, has quality use)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(spoon, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(spoon, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(razor blade, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(razor blade, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(brush, has quality better)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(brush, has quality good)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(brush, has quality good)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(brush, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(brush, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality use)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(tool, has quality worth)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality worth)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality good)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality bad)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(tool, is best)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Typical(cooking utensil, has quality use)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(wooden spoon, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(cooking utensil, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(spoon, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(spoon, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(razor blade, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality use)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(tool, has quality worth)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(utensil, has quality worth)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(brush, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(tool, is best)