crime: be problem in america

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents conspiracy
Weight: 0.63
, tragedy
Weight: 0.61
, action
Weight: 0.60
, attack
Weight: 0.58
Siblings arson
Weight: 0.70
, sexual harassment
Weight: 0.69
, cruelty
Weight: 0.68
, pedophilia
Weight: 0.68
, drunk driving
Weight: 0.68

Related properties

Property Similarity
be problem in america 1.00
increase in america 0.86
was problem in london 0.84
decrease in america 0.84
be high in latin america 0.81
was problem in victorian london 0.80
has state problem 0.79
become problem 0.79
be considered problem 0.78
is suddenly problem 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.27
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(action, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(crime, be problem in america)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(action, has state problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(action, has state problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(drunk driving, has state problem)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(drunk driving, is suddenly problem)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(drunk driving, become problem)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(sexual harassment, has state problem)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(action, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(crime, be problem in america)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(sexual harassment, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(sexual harassment, has state problem)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(drunk driving, become problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(drunk driving, become problem)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(drunk driving, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(drunk driving, has state problem)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(drunk driving, is suddenly problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(drunk driving, is suddenly problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(crime, be problem in america)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.81
Typical(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(crime, has state problem)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(crime, has state problem)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(crime, was problem in london)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(crime, has state problem)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(crime, was problem in london)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.81
Typical(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(crime, was problem in london)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(crime, was problem in victorian london)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(crime, was problem in victorian london)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(crime, was problem in london)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
Typical(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(crime, was problem in victorian london)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(crime, was problem in victorian london)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(crime, has state problem)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(crime, be problem in america)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(action, has state problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(sexual harassment, has state problem)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(drunk driving, become problem)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(drunk driving, is suddenly problem)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(drunk driving, has state problem)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.81
Typical(crime, be problem in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(action, has state problem)