crack: is more addictive

Related concepts

Parents	drug Weight: 0.62 , problem Weight: 0.59 , surface Weight: 0.57 , word Weight: 0.56
Siblings	dike Weight: 0.45 , cracking Weight: 0.35 , cocain Weight: 0.33 , tear Weight: 0.32 , methamphetamine Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property	Similarity
is more addictive	1.00
is addictive	0.98

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.54

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(drug, is addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Typical(crack, is more addictive)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Plausible(drug, is addictive)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.16

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.94

¬ Remarkable(drug, is addictive)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(cracking, is addictive)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(drug, is addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

Remarkable(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Plausible(crack, is more addictive)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

Remarkable(cracking, is addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Plausible(cracking, is addictive)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Salient(crack, is more addictive)

Similarity expansion

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.53

Typical(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.43

¬ Typical(crack, is addictive)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.75

Remarkable(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Remarkable(crack, is addictive)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.69

Salient(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Salient(crack, is addictive)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Plausible(crack, is addictive)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.69

Salient(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Typical(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(crack, is more addictive)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Typical(crack, is more addictive)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.29

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Typical(drug, is addictive)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.19

¬ Typical(cracking, is addictive)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.53

Typical(crack, is more addictive) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Typical(drug, is addictive)