dam: be bad for environment

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents project
Weight: 0.64
, barrier
Weight: 0.61
, site
Weight: 0.60
, factor
Weight: 0.60
Siblings bridge
Weight: 0.35
, construction site
Weight: 0.34
, dike
Weight: 0.34
, levee
Weight: 0.33
, creek
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be bad for environment 1.00
be good for environment 0.97
affect environment 0.87
is good for 0.80
has quality bad 0.80
has quality good 0.77
be bad for fish 0.75

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

0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(barrier, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(barrier, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(site, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(project, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(project, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(project, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(project, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(site, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(barrier, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(barrier, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(project, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(barrier, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(site, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(barrier, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(project, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(levee, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(bridge, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(barrier, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(dam, be bad for environment)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(site, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(dam, be bad for environment)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(barrier, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(dam, be bad for environment)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(project, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(dam, be bad for environment)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(project, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(dam, be bad for environment)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(levee, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(levee, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(bridge, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(bridge, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Salient(dam, be bad for environment)

Similarity expansion

0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(dam, be good for environment)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for fish)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(dam, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.23
Salient(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(dam, be bad for fish)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for fish)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Salient(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment)

Typical implies Plausible

0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(dam, be bad for environment)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(project, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(site, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(project, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(barrier, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(barrier, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(levee, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(bridge, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(project, has quality bad)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(project, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(site, has quality bad)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(barrier, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(dam, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(barrier, has quality good)