camera: be different from traditional cameras

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents digital camera
Weight: 0.75
, electronic device
Weight: 0.68
, recorder
Weight: 0.64
, driver
Weight: 0.61
Siblings camera lens
Weight: 0.70
, human eye
Weight: 0.60
, underwater
Weight: 0.54
, cctv
Weight: 0.54
, flip
Weight: 0.54

Related properties

Property Similarity
be different from traditional cameras 1.00
be different from cameras 0.94
be different from regular cameras 0.92
have cameras 0.87
is cameras 0.86
be called cameras 0.86
be better than film cameras 0.84
be more efficient than film cameras 0.82
is camera 0.80
is video camera 0.79

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: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(driver, have cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.12
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(digital camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.14
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.05
Plausible(digital camera, be better than film cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.12
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(digital camera, be different from cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.10
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(digital camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(digital camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(digital camera, be different from cameras)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(digital camera, be better than film cameras)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(digital camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(driver, have cameras)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.51
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, be different from cameras)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, be better than film cameras)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(driver, have cameras)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(flip, is video camera)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(flip, is camera)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(cctv, is cameras)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(driver, have cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(digital camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(digital camera, be different from cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.05
Plausible(digital camera, be better than film cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(digital camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(cctv, is cameras)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(cctv, is cameras)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(flip, is camera)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(flip, is camera)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.16
Remarkable(flip, is video camera)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(flip, is video camera)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(camera, be different from traditional cameras)

Similarity expansion

0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(camera, be different from regular cameras)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(camera, be different from regular cameras)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Salient(camera, be better than film cameras)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(camera, be called cameras)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(camera, be called cameras)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(camera, be different from regular cameras)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(camera, be better than film cameras)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(camera, be called cameras)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(camera, be better than film cameras)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Remarkable(camera, be better than film cameras)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from regular cameras)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(camera, be called cameras)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.49
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(digital camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(digital camera, be different from cameras)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(digital camera, be better than film cameras)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(digital camera, be more efficient than film cameras)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(driver, have cameras)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(cctv, is cameras)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(flip, is camera)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(flip, is video camera)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(digital camera, be different from traditional cameras)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(digital camera, be different from cameras)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(digital camera, be better than film cameras)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(driver, have cameras)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(camera, be different from traditional cameras)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(digital camera, be more efficient than film cameras)