client: be susceptible to infection

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents creditor
Weight: 0.63
, family member
Weight: 0.62
, enterprise
Weight: 0.61
, partner
Weight: 0.61
Siblings real estate agent
Weight: 0.67
, owner
Weight: 0.63
, drug dealer
Weight: 0.63
, samsung
Weight: 0.62
, rolling stone
Weight: 0.61

Related properties

Property Similarity
be susceptible to infection 1.00
has risk for infection 0.89
have molluscum 0.77

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

0.22
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(partner, have molluscum) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(client, be susceptible to infection)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(partner, have molluscum)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(partner, have molluscum)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.23
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(partner, have molluscum) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(client, be susceptible to infection)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(client, be susceptible to infection)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(client, has risk for infection)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(client, has risk for infection)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(client, has risk for infection)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(client, has risk for infection)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(client, be susceptible to infection)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(client, be susceptible to infection)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(partner, have molluscum)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(client, be susceptible to infection) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(partner, have molluscum)