cost: analysis

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents operating expense
Weight: 0.70
, burden
Weight: 0.63
, estimate
Weight: 0.63
, variable
Weight: 0.62
Siblings income tax
Weight: 0.69
, deductible
Weight: 0.65
, tuition
Weight: 0.64
, fee
Weight: 0.64
, overhead
Weight: 0.64

Related properties

Property Similarity
analysis 1.00
is analysis 1.00
is effectiveness analysis 0.84
is utility analysis 0.83

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

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Salient(cost, analysis)

Similarity expansion

0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(cost, is analysis)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(cost, is analysis)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(cost, is analysis)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(cost, is utility analysis)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(cost, is analysis)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(cost, is effectiveness analysis)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Salient(cost, is utility analysis)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(cost, is utility analysis)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(cost, is effectiveness analysis)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(cost, is effectiveness analysis)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(cost, is utility analysis)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(cost, is effectiveness analysis)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(cost, analysis)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(cost, analysis) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(cost, analysis)