david: were related

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents friend
Weight: 0.61
, person
Weight: 0.61
, guest
Weight: 0.59
, hero
Weight: 0.59
Siblings henry david thoreau
Weight: 0.37
, paul mccartney
Weight: 0.36
, william james
Weight: 0.36
, paul
Weight: 0.36
, gordon
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
were related 1.00
be related 0.93
is related 0.92

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

0.30
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(hero, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(david, were related)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(hero, be related)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(hero, be related)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(hero, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(david, were related)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(david, were related)

Similarity expansion

0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(david, be related)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(david, be related)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(david, be related)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(david, be related)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(david, were related)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(david, were related)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(hero, be related)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(david, were related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(hero, be related)