conservation: be used

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents program
Weight: 0.62
, topic
Weight: 0.60
, strategy
Weight: 0.59
, concept
Weight: 0.59
, issue
Weight: 0.58
Siblings biodiversity
Weight: 0.34
, ecology
Weight: 0.34
, wildlife
Weight: 0.34
, recycling
Weight: 0.33
, animal husbandry
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be used 1.00
use 5x5 0.83
be allowed use 0.81
utilized by fast-food restaurants 0.76

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

0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(program, be allowed use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(conservation, be used)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(concept, utilized by fast-food restaurants) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(conservation, be used)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(program, be allowed use)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(concept, utilized by fast-food restaurants)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(concept, utilized by fast-food restaurants)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(program, be allowed use)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(program, be allowed use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(conservation, be used)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(concept, utilized by fast-food restaurants) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(conservation, be used)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(conservation, be used)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(conservation, be used)

Typical implies Plausible

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(conservation, be used)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(program, be allowed use)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(concept, utilized by fast-food restaurants)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(program, be allowed use)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(conservation, be used) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(concept, utilized by fast-food restaurants)