conifer: be adapted to dry conditions

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents species
Weight: 0.68
, deciduous tree
Weight: 0.55
, evergreen
Weight: 0.50
, shrub
Weight: 0.50
, topic
Weight: 0.46
Siblings juniper
Weight: 0.74
, douglas fir
Weight: 0.73
, cedar
Weight: 0.70
, pine
Weight: 0.67
, pine tree
Weight: 0.61

Related properties

Property Similarity
be adapted to dry conditions 1.00
be adapted to conditions 0.95
be adapted to cold weather climates 0.89
be adapted to weather climates 0.88
be adapted to cold climates 0.88
be adapted to climates 0.86
be adapted to environment 0.85
be adapted 0.83
be adapted living 0.81
be adapted living in taiga 0.78

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

0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(deciduous tree, be adapted to cold climates)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(deciduous tree, be adapted to climates)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(deciduous tree, be adapted to cold climates)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(deciduous tree, be adapted to climates)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(deciduous tree, be adapted to climates)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(deciduous tree, be adapted to cold climates)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(pine, be adapted)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(pine, be adapted to environment)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(deciduous tree, be adapted to cold climates)
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(deciduous tree, be adapted to climates)
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(pine, be adapted to environment)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(pine, be adapted to environment)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(pine, be adapted)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(pine, be adapted)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(conifer, be adapted to conditions)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to conditions)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted to conditions)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(conifer, be adapted to cold weather climates)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(conifer, be adapted to weather climates)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to cold weather climates)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted to cold weather climates)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to weather climates)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted to weather climates)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to conditions)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(conifer, be adapted living)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to weather climates)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to cold weather climates)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(conifer, be adapted living in taiga)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted living in taiga)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted living)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted living)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted living)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(conifer, be adapted living in taiga)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted living in taiga)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(deciduous tree, be adapted to cold climates)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(deciduous tree, be adapted to climates)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(pine, be adapted to environment)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(pine, be adapted)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(deciduous tree, be adapted to cold climates)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(conifer, be adapted to dry conditions)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(deciduous tree, be adapted to climates)