communication: be important in total quality management

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 total quality management 1.00
be important in quality management 0.93
using total internal reflection 0.81
affect management philosophy 0.80
using total reflection 0.80
be considered essence of management 0.79
be essence of management 0.78
has quality good 0.78
is quality 0.78
essence of management 0.78

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

0.37
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(gap, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(communication, be important in total quality management)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(failure, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(communication, be important in total quality management)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(failure, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(gap, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(failure, has quality good)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(gap, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(coordination, be essence of management)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(coordination, be considered essence of management)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(coordination, essence of management)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(gap, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.00
Plausible(failure, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(coordination, be considered essence of management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(coordination, be considered essence of management)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(coordination, essence of management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(coordination, essence of management)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(coordination, be essence of management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(coordination, be essence of management)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(communication, be important in total quality management)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Salient(communication, using total internal reflection)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(communication, using total internal reflection)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(communication, using total internal reflection)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Plausible(communication, using total internal reflection)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(communication, be important in total quality management)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(failure, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(gap, is quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(coordination, essence of management)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(coordination, be considered essence of management)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(coordination, be essence of management)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(failure, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(communication, be important in total quality management) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(gap, is quality)