contractor: have a down year for liability insurance

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents construction worker
Weight: 0.70
, workman
Weight: 0.63
, professional
Weight: 0.61
, employee
Weight: 0.61
Siblings architect
Weight: 0.71
, engineer
Weight: 0.65
, builder
Weight: 0.63
, plumber
Weight: 0.63
, agent
Weight: 0.62

Related properties

Property Similarity
have a down year for liability insurance 1.00
have a down year for general liability insurance 0.98
have a for liability insurance 0.97
have a for general liability insurance 0.95
need indemnity insurance 0.87
need insurance 0.87
need professional indemnity insurance 0.87
need pollution insurance 0.82
pay employers insurance 0.82
pay employers national insurance 0.82

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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(architect, need professional indemnity insurance)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(architect, need insurance)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(builder, need insurance)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(builder, need insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(builder, need insurance)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(architect, need insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(architect, need insurance)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(architect, need professional indemnity insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(architect, need professional indemnity insurance)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(contractor, have a down year for general liability insurance)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(contractor, have a for liability insurance)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(contractor, need insurance)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(contractor, have a for general liability insurance)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(contractor, need indemnity insurance)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(contractor, need professional indemnity insurance)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(contractor, need insurance)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(contractor, need pollution insurance)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(contractor, need indemnity insurance)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(contractor, need indemnity insurance)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(contractor, pay employers insurance)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(contractor, pay employers national insurance)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(contractor, need pollution insurance)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(contractor, have a for liability insurance)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(contractor, have a for general liability insurance)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(contractor, have a down year for general liability insurance)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(contractor, pay employers insurance)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Salient(contractor, pay employers insurance)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(contractor, need indemnity insurance)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(contractor, need pollution insurance)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(contractor, need professional indemnity insurance)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(contractor, pay employers national insurance)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(contractor, pay employers national insurance)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for general liability insurance)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Salient(contractor, need professional indemnity insurance)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Salient(contractor, need insurance)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Remarkable(contractor, pay employers national insurance)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a for liability insurance)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, pay employers insurance)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(contractor, need professional indemnity insurance)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(contractor, have a down year for general liability insurance)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(contractor, have a for liability insurance)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(contractor, have a for general liability insurance)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(contractor, need pollution insurance)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a for general liability insurance)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(contractor, need insurance)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(builder, need insurance)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(architect, need insurance)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(contractor, have a down year for liability insurance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(architect, need professional indemnity insurance)