camera: be important for mobiles

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 important for mobiles 1.00
be better than smartphones 0.80
be horrible in mobile 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

0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.17
Plausible(digital camera, be better than smartphones) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(camera, be important for mobiles)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(digital camera, be better than smartphones)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, be better than smartphones)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.17
Plausible(digital camera, be better than smartphones) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
Remarkable(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(camera, be important for mobiles)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Salient(camera, be important for mobiles)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.03
Remarkable(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(camera, be better than smartphones)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(camera, be better than smartphones)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(camera, be better than smartphones)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.26
Typical(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(camera, be better than smartphones)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(camera, be important for mobiles)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(camera, be important for mobiles)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(digital camera, be better than smartphones)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.26
Typical(camera, be important for mobiles) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(digital camera, be better than smartphones)