decay: has quality change

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents process
Weight: 0.61
, hazard
Weight: 0.56
, problem
Weight: 0.55
, condition
Weight: 0.53
, sign
Weight: 0.52
Siblings beta decay
Weight: 0.57
, tooth decay
Weight: 0.36
, alpha decay
Weight: 0.34
, macular degeneration
Weight: 0.34
, decomposition
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality change 1.00
has quality good 0.86
has quality bad 0.86
is quality 0.84
be related to change 0.81
be considered change 0.81
be with climate changes 0.78
were changed by revolution 0.77
has state improvement 0.77
be related to social change 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: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(decay, has quality change)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(process, has state improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(decay, has quality change)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(problem, be related to social change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(decay, has quality change)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(process, is quality)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(problem, be related to social change)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(process, has state improvement)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(process, is quality)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(process, has state improvement)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(problem, be related to social change)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(decomposition, has quality change)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(tooth decay, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(decomposition, be considered change)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(decay, has quality change)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(process, has state improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(decay, has quality change)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(problem, be related to social change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(decay, has quality change)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(decomposition, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(decomposition, has quality change)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
Remarkable(decomposition, be considered change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(decomposition, be considered change)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(tooth decay, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(tooth decay, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Salient(decay, has quality change)

Similarity expansion

0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.13
Salient(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Salient(decay, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(decay, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(decay, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Salient(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(decay, has quality change)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(problem, be related to social change)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(process, has state improvement)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(decomposition, has quality change)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(tooth decay, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(decomposition, be considered change)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(problem, be related to social change)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(decay, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(process, has state improvement)