dam: be beneficial to farmlands

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 beneficial to farmlands 1.00
influence farming 0.76
is beneficial 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

0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(factor, influence farming) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(dam, be beneficial to farmlands)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Plausible(factor, influence farming)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(factor, influence farming)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(levee, be beneficial to farmlands)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(factor, influence farming) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(dam, be beneficial to farmlands)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(levee, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(levee, be beneficial to farmlands)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(dam, be beneficial to farmlands)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(dam, be beneficial to farmlands)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(dam, be beneficial to farmlands)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(factor, influence farming)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(levee, be beneficial to farmlands)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(dam, be beneficial to farmlands) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(factor, influence farming)