communication: be important in science

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

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 important in science 1.00
be crucial in science 0.93
be important skill in science 0.87
be needed biology 0.83
be important in education 0.82
be important in human geography 0.81
be important part of scientific method 0.81
have important to scientist world systems 0.80
be important in organisation 0.79
be important in georgraphy 0.79

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

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(department, be important in organisation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(communication, be important in science)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(failure, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(communication, be important in science)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(failure, be important in science)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(department, be important in organisation)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.52
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(failure, be important in science)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(department, be important in organisation)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(coordination, be needed biology)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(failure, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(communication, be important in science)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(department, be important in organisation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(communication, be important in science)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(coordination, be needed biology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(coordination, be needed biology)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(communication, be important in science)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(communication, be important skill in science)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(communication, be important skill in science)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(communication, be important skill in science)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(communication, be important in education)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(communication, be important in education)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(communication, be important part of scientific method)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(communication, be important part of scientific method)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(communication, be important in education)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important skill in science)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(communication, be important part of scientific method)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in education)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important part of scientific method)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(communication, be important in science)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(failure, be important in science)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(department, be important in organisation)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(coordination, be needed biology)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(failure, be important in science)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(communication, be important in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(department, be important in organisation)