champion: best opponent

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents title
Weight: 0.71
, player
Weight: 0.61
, man
Weight: 0.58
, star
Weight: 0.57
, member
Weight: 0.55
Siblings winner
Weight: 0.36
, victor
Weight: 0.34
, tennis player
Weight: 0.33
, old man
Weight: 0.33
, football player
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
best opponent 1.00
serve to his opponent 0.87
service to her opponent 0.84
best loser 0.77
win match 0.76
be defined as person who win game 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.16
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(player, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(champion, best opponent)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(player, best opponent)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(player, best opponent)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(winner, best loser)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, serve to his opponent)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(winner, be defined as person who win game)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, win match)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(player, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(champion, best opponent)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(tennis player, serve to his opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(tennis player, serve to his opponent)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(tennis player, win match) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(tennis player, win match)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(winner, best loser) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(winner, best loser)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(winner, be defined as person who win game) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(winner, be defined as person who win game)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Salient(champion, best opponent)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Salient(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent)

Typical implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(champion, best opponent)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(player, best opponent)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(winner, be defined as person who win game)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(tennis player, serve to his opponent)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(tennis player, service to her opponent)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(winner, best loser)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(tennis player, win match)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(champion, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(player, best opponent)