consumer: benif from businesses having

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents sector
Weight: 0.62
, business people
Weight: 0.61
, mechanism
Weight: 0.60
, client
Weight: 0.59
Siblings user
Weight: 0.64
, plaintiff
Weight: 0.61
, pet owner
Weight: 0.58
, listener
Weight: 0.54
, boomer
Weight: 0.45

Related properties

Property Similarity
benif from businesses having 1.00
benif from businesses 0.94
benefit from competition among businesses 0.83
take advantage of businesses 0.81
be important to business 0.78
benefit from industries 0.78
benefit from competitive industries 0.76
benefit from perfectly competitive industries 0.76
be important to retail business 0.76
defend large companies 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

0.43
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(client, be important to business)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(consumer, benif from businesses having)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(client, be important to business)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.29
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(client, be important to business)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(client, be important to business)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(consumer, benif from businesses having)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Salient(consumer, benif from businesses having)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(consumer, take advantage of businesses)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(consumer, take advantage of businesses)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(consumer, benefit from competition among businesses)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(consumer, take advantage of businesses)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(consumer, benefit from competition among businesses)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(consumer, benefit from competition among businesses)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(consumer, benefit from competition among businesses)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(consumer, take advantage of businesses)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(consumer, benif from businesses having)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(consumer, benif from businesses having)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(client, be important to business)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(consumer, benif from businesses having)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(client, be important to business)