corporation: were better for large businesses

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents financial institution
Weight: 0.69
, system
Weight: 0.67
, enterprise
Weight: 0.65
, employer
Weight: 0.64
Siblings joint stock company
Weight: 0.67
, oil company
Weight: 0.65
, american express
Weight: 0.63
, chrysler
Weight: 0.62
, ibm
Weight: 0.61

Related properties

Property Similarity
were better for large businesses 1.00
be more suitable for large organizations 0.83
break into smaller business units 0.81
be less risky than privately owned businesses 0.81
be more suitable for large organization 0.79

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(corporation, were better for large businesses)

Similarity expansion

0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.91
Salient(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(corporation, break into smaller business units)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.91
Salient(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(corporation, be less risky than privately owned businesses)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.90
Typical(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(corporation, break into smaller business units)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.90
Typical(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(corporation, be less risky than privately owned businesses)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(corporation, break into smaller business units)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(corporation, be less risky than privately owned businesses)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(corporation, break into smaller business units)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(corporation, be less risky than privately owned businesses)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Salient(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(corporation, were better for large businesses)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(corporation, were better for large businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(corporation, were better for large businesses)