communication: be considered as art

Related concepts

Parents	fundamental Weight: 0.64 , department Weight: 0.62 , gap Weight: 0.61 , failure Weight: 0.61
Siblings	coordination Weight: 0.57 , solicitation Weight: 0.54 , broadcasting Weight: 0.53 , acknowledgement Weight: 0.51 , infrared Weight: 0.50

Related properties

Property	Similarity
be considered as art	1.00
be considered as thing	0.80
be regarded as essence	0.78
be regarded as complex	0.78
be considered as process	0.78
be considered as multi-dimensional process	0.78
be considered as good thing	0.78
be regarded as essence of management	0.77
be regarded as difficult	0.77

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.29

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.08

Plausible(failure, be considered as thing) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(communication, be considered as art)

0.27

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.00

Plausible(failure, be considered as good thing) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(communication, be considered as art)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.00

¬ Plausible(failure, be considered as good thing)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.08

¬ Plausible(failure, be considered as thing)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.01

¬ Remarkable(failure, be considered as good thing)

0.40

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.27

¬ Remarkable(failure, be considered as thing)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Remarkable(coordination, be regarded as essence)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Remarkable(coordination, be regarded as essence of management)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.27

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.08

Plausible(failure, be considered as thing) ⋁

Evidence: 0.45

Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Plausible(communication, be considered as art)

0.26

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.00

Plausible(failure, be considered as good thing) ⋁

Evidence: 0.45

Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Plausible(communication, be considered as art)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

Remarkable(coordination, be regarded as essence) ⋁

Evidence: 0.14

¬ Plausible(coordination, be regarded as essence)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

Remarkable(coordination, be regarded as essence of management) ⋁

Evidence: 0.32

¬ Plausible(coordination, be regarded as essence of management)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Salient(communication, be considered as art)

Similarity expansion

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.16

¬ Typical(communication, be considered as process)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as multi-dimensional process)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.32

¬ Plausible(communication, be considered as process)

0.51

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.45

Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Remarkable(communication, be regarded as difficult)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.35

Salient(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Salient(communication, be considered as multi-dimensional process)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Plausible(communication, be considered as multi-dimensional process)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.61

¬ Typical(communication, be regarded as complex)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.35

Salient(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Salient(communication, be considered as process)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.68

¬ Typical(communication, be considered as multi-dimensional process)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.35

Salient(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Salient(communication, be regarded as difficult)

0.42

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(communication, be regarded as difficult)

0.42

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Plausible(communication, be regarded as complex)

0.41

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.73

¬ Typical(communication, be regarded as difficult)

0.39

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.76

¬ Remarkable(communication, be regarded as complex)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.35

Salient(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.73

¬ Salient(communication, be regarded as complex)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as process)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.35

Salient(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(communication, be considered as art)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.13

¬ Typical(failure, be considered as thing)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Typical(failure, be considered as good thing)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.03

¬ Typical(coordination, be regarded as essence)

0.10

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.14

¬ Typical(coordination, be regarded as essence of management)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.36

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.13

¬ Typical(failure, be considered as thing)

0.36

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(communication, be considered as art) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Typical(failure, be considered as good thing)