computer program: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents computer game
Weight: 0.81
, electronic device
Weight: 0.74
, computer
Weight: 0.72
, technology
Weight: 0.71
Siblings computer science
Weight: 0.74
, computer virus
Weight: 0.73
, operating system
Weight: 0.73
, web browser
Weight: 0.72

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality system 0.82
has quality definition 0.75

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

0.61
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer game, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(computer game, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(electronic device, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(technology, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(technology, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(technology, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(technology, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(computer game, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(electronic device, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(computer game, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.53
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(electronic device, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(computer game, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(computer game, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(web browser, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(computer virus, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(computer science, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(operating system, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer game, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(computer game, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(electronic device, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(technology, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(technology, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(computer virus, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(computer virus, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(web browser, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(web browser, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(operating system, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(operating system, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(computer science, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(computer science, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(computer program, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality good)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(computer program, has quality good)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality good)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality system)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality system)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(computer program, has quality system)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality definition)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(computer program, has quality definition)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality definition)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality definition)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality system)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(electronic device, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(computer game, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(computer game, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(operating system, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(computer virus, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(web browser, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(computer science, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(computer game, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(electronic device, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(computer program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(computer game, has quality good)