compression: has quality good

Related concepts

Parents	variable Weight: 0.66 , technology Weight: 0.65 , parameter Weight: 0.63 , feature Weight: 0.63 , method Weight: 0.63
Siblings	jitter Weight: 0.34 , acceleration Weight: 0.34 , throughput Weight: 0.34 , viscosity Weight: 0.34 , amplitude Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality good	1.00
has quality bad	0.96
affect quality	0.81
feel good	0.80

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.52

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.80

Plausible(variable, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(compression, has quality good)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(compression, has quality good)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.63

Plausible(technology, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(compression, has quality good)

0.19

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.21

Plausible(technology, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(compression, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.21

¬ Plausible(technology, has quality bad)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Plausible(technology, has quality good)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(variable, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.16

¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality bad)

0.37

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.60

¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality good)

0.28

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Remarkable(variable, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Remarkable(jitter, has quality good)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Remarkable(acceleration, feel good)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Remarkable(throughput, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.80

Plausible(variable, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Plausible(compression, has quality good)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.63

Plausible(technology, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Plausible(compression, has quality good)

0.37

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Plausible(compression, has quality good)

0.31

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.21

Plausible(technology, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Plausible(compression, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

Remarkable(jitter, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Plausible(jitter, has quality good)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

Remarkable(throughput, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.73

¬ Plausible(throughput, has quality good)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

Remarkable(acceleration, feel good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.30

¬ Plausible(acceleration, feel good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Salient(compression, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.76

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.92

Salient(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.86

¬ Salient(compression, has quality bad)

0.73

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Typical(compression, has quality bad)

0.71

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Plausible(compression, has quality bad)

0.66

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.42

¬ Typical(compression, affect quality)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.92

Salient(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Salient(compression, feel good)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.61

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality bad)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.92

Salient(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.76

¬ Salient(compression, affect quality)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(compression, feel good)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Plausible(compression, affect quality)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Plausible(compression, feel good)

0.54

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

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.61

¬ Remarkable(compression, feel good)

0.49

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(compression, affect quality)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.92

Salient(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.84

Plausible(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(compression, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.31

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)

0.26

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)

0.22

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(variable, has quality bad)

0.22

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Typical(jitter, has quality good)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Typical(throughput, has quality good)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.80

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Typical(acceleration, feel good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)

0.42

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(variable, has quality bad)

0.42

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.88

Typical(compression, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)