cross: be team work related to interaction

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents object
Weight: 0.59
, game
Weight: 0.57
, pattern
Weight: 0.56
, device
Weight: 0.54
Siblings soccer ball
Weight: 0.32
, hockey game
Weight: 0.31
, curling
Weight: 0.31
, handball
Weight: 0.31
, football game
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be team work related to interaction 1.00
be functional team work related to interaction 0.95
be team work related to interaction among departments 0.91
be functional team work related to interaction among departments 0.90
be team work related 0.86
be functional team work related 0.83
be team work 0.81
be functional team work 0.79
is communication important 0.78
is functional coordination 0.76

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

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)

Similarity expansion

0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(cross, be functional team work related to interaction)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction among departments)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(cross, be functional team work related to interaction among departments)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(cross, be functional team work related to interaction)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction among departments)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(cross, be functional team work related to interaction)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(cross, be functional team work related to interaction)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(cross, be functional team work related)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(cross, be functional team work related to interaction among departments)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(cross, be functional team work related to interaction among departments)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(cross, be functional team work related to interaction among departments)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(cross, be functional team work)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(cross, be functional team work related)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction among departments)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction among departments)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(cross, be functional team work)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(cross, be functional team work related)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(cross, be functional team work)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(cross, be functional team work related)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(cross, be functional team work)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(cross, be team work related to interaction)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(cross, be team work related to interaction)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(cross, be team work related to interaction)