confusion: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents issue
Weight: 0.63
, thing
Weight: 0.60
, symptom
Weight: 0.60
, factor
Weight: 0.60
Siblings uncertainty
Weight: 0.65
, chaos
Weight: 0.34
, tension
Weight: 0.34
, panic
Weight: 0.34
, frustration
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
is bad thing 0.79

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

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(frustration, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(chaos, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(uncertainty, has quality good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(chaos, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(uncertainty, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
Remarkable(frustration, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(frustration, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(chaos, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(chaos, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(uncertainty, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(uncertainty, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
Remarkable(uncertainty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(uncertainty, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(chaos, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(chaos, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Salient(confusion, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.82
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Plausible(confusion, has quality good)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
Salient(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Salient(confusion, has quality good)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality good)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(confusion, has quality good)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(confusion, is bad thing)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(confusion, is bad thing)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.34
Salient(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Salient(confusion, is bad thing)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(confusion, is bad thing)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.34
Salient(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(confusion, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(frustration, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(chaos, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(uncertainty, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(uncertainty, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(confusion, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(chaos, has quality bad)