child neglect: has state problem

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents charge
Weight: 0.65
, parent
Weight: 0.63
, problem
Weight: 0.57
, concern
Weight: 0.57
, crime
Weight: 0.56
Siblings mental health problem
Weight: 0.34
, cruelty
Weight: 0.34
, negligence
Weight: 0.34
, first degree murder
Weight: 0.33
, sexual harassment
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state problem 1.00
is social problem 0.85

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

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(crime, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(child neglect, has state problem)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(crime, is social problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(child neglect, has state problem)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(crime, has state problem)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(crime, is social problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(crime, has state problem)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(crime, is social problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(sexual harassment, has state problem)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(sexual harassment, is social problem)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(crime, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(child neglect, has state problem)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(crime, is social problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(child neglect, has state problem)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(sexual harassment, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(sexual harassment, has state problem)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(sexual harassment, is social problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(sexual harassment, is social problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Salient(child neglect, has state problem)

Similarity expansion

0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(child neglect, is social problem)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(child neglect, is social problem)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Salient(child neglect, is social problem)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, is social problem)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
Salient(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(child neglect, has state problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(crime, has state problem)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(crime, is social problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Typical(sexual harassment, is social problem)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(sexual harassment, has state problem)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(crime, has state problem)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(child neglect, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(crime, is social problem)