color blindness: has state problem

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents blindness
Weight: 0.73
, disease
Weight: 0.64
, vision
Weight: 0.61
, thing
Weight: 0.61
, factor
Weight: 0.59
Siblings hair color
Weight: 0.36
, lyme disease
Weight: 0.36
, macular degeneration
Weight: 0.35
, glaucoma
Weight: 0.35
, pelvic inflammatory disease
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state problem 1.00
has state disorder 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

0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(color blindness, has state problem)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(blindness, has state problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(blindness, has state problem)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(color blindness, has state problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(color blindness, has state problem)

Similarity expansion

0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.84
Typical(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(color blindness, has state disorder)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(color blindness, has state disorder)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(color blindness, has state disorder)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(color blindness, has state disorder)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(color blindness, has state problem)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(color blindness, has state problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(blindness, has state problem)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Typical(color blindness, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(blindness, has state problem)