condom: be in flavours

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents contraceptive
Weight: 0.72
, latex
Weight: 0.61
, method
Weight: 0.59
, barrier
Weight: 0.57
, product
Weight: 0.56
Siblings birth control pill
Weight: 0.35
, abortion
Weight: 0.33
, tampon
Weight: 0.32
, deodorant
Weight: 0.32
, mouthwash
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in flavours 1.00
be have flavours 0.84
be in use of incoterms 2000 0.78
be intolerated by people 0.77
have flavours 0.77
be in different flavours 0.76
be intolerated by many people 0.76
remain for longer 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

0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(barrier, be in use of incoterms 2000) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(condom, be in flavours)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(barrier, be in use of incoterms 2000)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(barrier, be in use of incoterms 2000)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(barrier, be in use of incoterms 2000) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
Remarkable(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(condom, be in flavours)

Salient implies Plausible

0.16
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(condom, be in flavours)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.99
Remarkable(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(condom, be have flavours)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.02
Typical(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Typical(condom, be have flavours)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.99
Remarkable(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(condom, have flavours)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.99
Remarkable(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(condom, be in different flavours)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.02
Typical(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Typical(condom, be in different flavours)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Salient(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(condom, be in flavours)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(condom, be in flavours)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(barrier, be in use of incoterms 2000)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.02
Typical(condom, be in flavours) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(barrier, be in use of incoterms 2000)