crt: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents device
Weight: 0.64
, display
Weight: 0.55
, electronic device
Weight: 0.53
, personal computer
Weight: 0.51
, keyboard
Weight: 0.47
Siblings computer keyboard
Weight: 0.35
, pda
Weight: 0.35
, laptop computer
Weight: 0.34
, x ray machine
Weight: 0.34
, modem
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
has quality wrong 0.87
has quality worth 0.82
go bad 0.79
be considered bad 0.78
be bad in school 0.77
is terrible 0.77
feel good 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(keyboard, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(device, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(keyboard, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(electronic device, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(display, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(display, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(electronic device, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(device, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(keyboard, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(keyboard, has quality better)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(display, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(electronic device, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(device, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(keyboard, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(keyboard, has quality better)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(pda, be bad in school)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(modem, go bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(pda, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(pda, has quality wrong)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(pda, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(keyboard, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(crt, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(display, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(crt, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(device, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(crt, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(electronic device, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(crt, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(keyboard, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(crt, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(pda, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(pda, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(pda, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(pda, has quality good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(pda, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Plausible(pda, has quality wrong)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(pda, be bad in school) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Plausible(pda, be bad in school)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(modem, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(modem, go bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(crt, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(crt, has quality better)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(crt, has quality better)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(crt, has quality better)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality better)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(crt, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(display, has quality bad)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(electronic device, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(device, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(keyboard, has quality good)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(keyboard, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(pda, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(pda, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(pda, be bad in school)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(pda, has quality wrong)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(modem, go bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(display, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(electronic device, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(device, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(keyboard, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(crt, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(keyboard, has quality better)