defense: be bad in ultimate

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents position
Weight: 0.62
, weakness
Weight: 0.61
, defense attorney
Weight: 0.59
, factor
Weight: 0.58
, sector
Weight: 0.58
Siblings offense
Weight: 0.33
, midfield
Weight: 0.33
, aviation
Weight: 0.32
, linebacker
Weight: 0.32
, third base
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be bad in ultimate 1.00
differ from greatest common factor 0.78
be great 0.77
is best 0.77
differ from greatest factor 0.77

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

0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(factor, differ from greatest common factor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(factor, differ from greatest factor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(factor, differ from greatest factor)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(factor, differ from greatest common factor)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(factor, differ from greatest common factor)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(factor, differ from greatest factor)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(factor, differ from greatest common factor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(factor, differ from greatest factor) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(defense, be bad in ultimate)

Similarity expansion

0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(defense, is best)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(defense, be great)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(defense, be great)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(defense, is best)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(defense, be great)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(defense, be great)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(defense, is best)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(defense, is best)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(factor, differ from greatest factor)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(factor, differ from greatest common factor)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(factor, differ from greatest factor)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(defense, be bad in ultimate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(factor, differ from greatest common factor)