computer science: is fascinating

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents science
Weight: 0.83
, technology
Weight: 0.75
, computer program
Weight: 0.74
, computer scientist
Weight: 0.73
Siblings mathematics
Weight: 0.72
, programming language
Weight: 0.67
, artificial intelligence
Weight: 0.65
, biology
Weight: 0.62

Related properties

Property Similarity
is fascinating 1.00
is interesting 0.89

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(biology, is interesting)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(artificial intelligence, is interesting)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(artificial intelligence, is interesting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(artificial intelligence, is interesting)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(biology, is interesting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(biology, is interesting)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(computer science, is fascinating)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(computer science, is interesting)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(computer science, is interesting)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(computer science, is interesting)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(computer science, is interesting)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(computer science, is fascinating)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(computer science, is fascinating)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(artificial intelligence, is interesting)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(computer science, is fascinating) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(biology, is interesting)