cooperation: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents operation
Weight: 0.63
, value
Weight: 0.62
, behavior
Weight: 0.61
, trait
Weight: 0.59
, thing
Weight: 0.58
Siblings openness
Weight: 0.33
, transparency
Weight: 0.33
, integration
Weight: 0.32
, solidarity
Weight: 0.32
, normalization
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality organization 0.78
is good thing 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(transparency, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(integration, is good thing)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(transparency, is good thing)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(transparency, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(transparency, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(integration, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(integration, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(transparency, is good thing) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(transparency, is good thing)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(integration, is good thing) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(integration, is good thing)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(cooperation, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(cooperation, is good thing)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(cooperation, is good thing)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(cooperation, has quality organization)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(cooperation, has quality organization)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(cooperation, has quality organization)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(cooperation, is good thing)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality organization)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, is good thing)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(cooperation, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(transparency, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(transparency, is good thing)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(integration, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(cooperation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(integration, is good thing)