debris: is global problem

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents danger
Weight: 0.62
, particle
Weight: 0.61
, condition
Weight: 0.58
, thing
Weight: 0.58
, problem
Weight: 0.56
Siblings garbage can
Weight: 0.64
, dead body
Weight: 0.64
, cobweb
Weight: 0.46
, thatch
Weight: 0.45
, lint
Weight: 0.43

Related properties

Property Similarity
is global problem 1.00
is global 0.88
has state problem 0.84

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(thatch, has state problem)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(thatch, has state problem)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(thatch, has state problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Salient(debris, is global problem)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(debris, is global)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.88
Typical(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(debris, has state problem)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(debris, has state problem)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(debris, has state problem)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(debris, is global)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(debris, has state problem)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(debris, is global)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(debris, is global)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(debris, is global problem)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(debris, is global problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(debris, is global problem)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(thatch, has state problem)