burning: has quality wrong

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents method
Weight: 0.60
, activity
Weight: 0.59
, practice
Weight: 0.58
, accident
Weight: 0.57
, discomfort
Weight: 0.57
Siblings explosion
Weight: 0.32
, combustion
Weight: 0.32
, campfire
Weight: 0.32
, business activity
Weight: 0.32
, sexual activity
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality wrong 1.00
has quality bad 0.87
has quality good 0.85
has quality change 0.82
be wrong flag 0.75

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

0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(practice, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(burning, has quality wrong)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(practice, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(burning, has quality wrong)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(burning, has quality wrong)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(practice, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(practice, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(practice, has quality bad)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(practice, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(explosion, has quality change)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(explosion, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(combustion, has quality change)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(combustion, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(practice, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality wrong)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality wrong)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(practice, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality wrong)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(explosion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(explosion, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(explosion, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(explosion, has quality change)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(business activity, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(combustion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(combustion, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(combustion, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(combustion, has quality change)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(burning, has quality wrong)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Salient(burning, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(burning, has quality bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(burning, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality good)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(burning, has quality bad)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(burning, has quality change)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(burning, has quality change)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(burning, be wrong flag)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality change)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality bad)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(burning, be wrong flag)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(burning, be wrong flag)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(burning, be wrong flag)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality change)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(burning, has quality wrong)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(practice, has quality good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(practice, has quality bad)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(explosion, has quality change)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(combustion, has quality change)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(explosion, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(combustion, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(business activity, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(practice, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(practice, has quality good)