calculator: was made

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents tool
Weight: 0.68
, application
Weight: 0.63
, electronic device
Weight: 0.61
, function
Weight: 0.60
Siblings abacus
Weight: 0.47
, spreadsheet
Weight: 0.36
, pencil sharpener
Weight: 0.34
, app
Weight: 0.34
, compass
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
was made 1.00
is made of 0.96
is made 0.96
was used in times 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

0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.29
Plausible(tool, is made)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(calculator, was made)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(tool, is made)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(tool, is made)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(abacus, is made)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(abacus, was used in times)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.29
Plausible(tool, is made)
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(calculator, was made)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(abacus, is made)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(abacus, is made)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(abacus, was used in times)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(abacus, was used in times)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Salient(calculator, was made)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(calculator, is made)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(calculator, is made of)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(calculator, is made of)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(calculator, is made)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(calculator, is made)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(calculator, is made of)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(calculator, is made of)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(calculator, is made)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(calculator, was made)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(tool, is made)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(abacus, is made)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(abacus, was used in times)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(calculator, was made)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(tool, is made)