ceiling: be in perth bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents limit
Weight: 0.60
, wall
Weight: 0.58
, floor
Weight: 0.57
, surface
Weight: 0.57
, structure
Weight: 0.56
Siblings soffit
Weight: 0.49
, ground floor
Weight: 0.35
, top floor
Weight: 0.34
, second floor
Weight: 0.34
, balcony
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in perth bad 1.00
be in perth 0.96
be low in england 0.78
is wet todd 0.77
be in victorian houses in uk 0.77
be in victorian houses in uk high 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

0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(floor, is wet todd) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(ceiling, be in perth bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(floor, is wet todd)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(floor, is wet todd)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(floor, is wet todd) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(ceiling, be in perth bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Salient(ceiling, be in perth bad)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Typical(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(ceiling, be in perth)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(ceiling, be in perth)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
Salient(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Salient(ceiling, be in perth)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(ceiling, be in victorian houses in uk)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
Salient(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(ceiling, be in perth bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(floor, is wet todd)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
Typical(ceiling, be in perth bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(floor, is wet todd)