contractor: use math

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
use math 1.00
use algebra 0.89

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

0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(construction worker, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(contractor, use math)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(construction worker, use algebra) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(contractor, use math)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(construction worker, use math)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(construction worker, use algebra)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(construction worker, use algebra)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(construction worker, use math)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(engineer, use math)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(architect, use math)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(architect, use algebra)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(engineer, use algebra)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Remarkable(builder, use algebra)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(construction worker, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(contractor, use math)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(construction worker, use algebra) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(contractor, use math)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
Remarkable(engineer, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(engineer, use math)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
Remarkable(architect, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(architect, use math)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
Remarkable(architect, use algebra) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(architect, use algebra)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
Remarkable(engineer, use algebra) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(engineer, use algebra)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
Remarkable(builder, use algebra) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(builder, use algebra)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(contractor, use math)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use algebra)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
Salient(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Salient(contractor, use algebra)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(contractor, use algebra)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(contractor, use algebra)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Salient(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(contractor, use math)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(construction worker, use math)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(construction worker, use algebra)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(architect, use math)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(engineer, use math)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(architect, use algebra)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(engineer, use algebra)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(builder, use algebra)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(construction worker, use math)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(contractor, use math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(construction worker, use algebra)