collision: has quality loss

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents event
Weight: 0.60
, action
Weight: 0.60
, car accident
Weight: 0.59
, operation
Weight: 0.55
Siblings crash
Weight: 0.35
, vehicular accident
Weight: 0.34
, drunk driving
Weight: 0.33
, explosion
Weight: 0.32
, confrontation
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality loss 1.00
has quality bad 0.79
has quality good 0.77
has quality change 0.77
is lost 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

0.34
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(car accident, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(collision, has quality loss)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(car accident, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(car accident, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(explosion, has quality change)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(explosion, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(crash, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(confrontation, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(car accident, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(collision, has quality loss)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(confrontation, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(confrontation, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(explosion, has quality change)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(explosion, has quality change)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(explosion, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(explosion, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.43
Remarkable(crash, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(crash, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(collision, has quality loss)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Salient(collision, is lost)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(collision, is lost)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(collision, is lost)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(collision, is lost)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(collision, has quality loss)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(car accident, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(explosion, has quality change)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(explosion, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(confrontation, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(crash, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(collision, has quality loss)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(car accident, has quality bad)