comedy: be different in 1930

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents programming
Weight: 0.62
, medium
Weight: 0.57
, style
Weight: 0.52
Siblings rock
Weight: 0.63
, groundhog day
Weight: 0.61
, bridesmaid
Weight: 0.60
, hot rod
Weight: 0.57
, dude
Weight: 0.57

Related properties

Property Similarity
be different in 1930 1.00
is different 0.97
be different than 2009 0.93
be different to individual 0.86
were similar 0.81
have weird times 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(rock, is different)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(rock, is different) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(rock, is different)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Salient(comedy, be different in 1930)

Similarity expansion

0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(comedy, is different)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(comedy, is different)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(comedy, be different to individual)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.76
Salient(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(comedy, is different)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(comedy, be different than 2009)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.76
Salient(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(comedy, be different than 2009)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(comedy, were similar)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Plausible(comedy, be different to individual)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(comedy, be different than 2009)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.76
Salient(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(comedy, be different to individual)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(comedy, be different than 2009)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(comedy, were similar)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(comedy, is different)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.76
Salient(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(comedy, were similar)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(comedy, be different to individual)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.76
Salient(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(comedy, have weird times)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(comedy, have weird times)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(comedy, were similar)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(comedy, have weird times)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(comedy, have weird times)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Salient(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(comedy, be different in 1930)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(comedy, be different in 1930) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(rock, is different)