defender: have hardest hitting combos

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents game
Weight: 0.61
, man
Weight: 0.58
, television
Weight: 0.56
, player
Weight: 0.55
Siblings goalie
Weight: 0.49
, soccer ball
Weight: 0.35
, winger
Weight: 0.34
, striker
Weight: 0.34
, football game
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
have hardest hitting combos 1.00
have hardest combos 0.97
have hitting combos 0.94
have combos 0.88

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(defender, have hardest hitting combos)

Similarity expansion

0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(defender, have hardest combos)
0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(defender, have hitting combos)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(defender, have hitting combos)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(defender, have hardest combos)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(defender, have hardest combos)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(defender, have combos)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(defender, have combos)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(defender, have hitting combos)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(defender, have combos)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(defender, have hitting combos)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Remarkable(defender, have combos)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(defender, have hardest combos)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(defender, have hardest hitting combos)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(defender, have hardest hitting combos) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(defender, have hardest hitting combos)