cam: is poor

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents mechanism
Weight: 0.60
, product
Weight: 0.57
, guy
Weight: 0.53
, application
Weight: 0.51
Siblings button
Weight: 0.32
, compact disc
Weight: 0.32
, immune system
Weight: 0.31
, piston
Weight: 0.31
, webcam
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
is poor 1.00
has quality bad 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(mechanism, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(cam, is poor)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(mechanism, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(mechanism, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(button, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(webcam, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(piston, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(mechanism, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(cam, is poor)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(piston, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(piston, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
Remarkable(webcam, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(webcam, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(button, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(button, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(cam, is poor)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.95
Typical(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(cam, has quality bad)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(cam, has quality bad)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(cam, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(cam, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(cam, is poor)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(mechanism, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(button, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(webcam, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(piston, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.95
Typical(cam, is poor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(mechanism, has quality bad)