ceramic: be better than zinc

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents medium
Weight: 0.59
, alloy
Weight: 0.59
, gift
Weight: 0.59
, industry
Weight: 0.58
, polymer
Weight: 0.58
Siblings silicon carbide
Weight: 0.73
, resin
Weight: 0.35
, acrylic
Weight: 0.35
, plastic
Weight: 0.35
, pottery
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be better than zinc 1.00
be less dense than metals 0.79
be more brittle than metals 0.77
is iron better 0.76
be better than glass 0.75

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(acrylic, be better than glass)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.36
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
Remarkable(acrylic, be better than glass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(acrylic, be better than glass)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(ceramic, be better than zinc)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(ceramic, be less dense than metals)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(ceramic, be more brittle than metals)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(ceramic, be less dense than metals)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Salient(ceramic, be more brittle than metals)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(ceramic, be less dense than metals)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(ceramic, be more brittle than metals)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(ceramic, be less dense than metals)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(ceramic, be more brittle than metals)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(ceramic, be better than zinc)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(ceramic, be better than zinc)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(ceramic, be better than zinc) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(acrylic, be better than glass)