denial: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents defense mechanism
Weight: 0.68
, issue
Weight: 0.63
, policy
Weight: 0.60
, behavior
Weight: 0.60
Siblings rejection
Weight: 0.34
, hypocrisy
Weight: 0.32
, court case
Weight: 0.32
, injustice
Weight: 0.32
, immune system
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality wrong 0.87
feel bad 0.80
is bad thing 0.79
hurt bad 0.77
feel good 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

0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(behavior, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(denial, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(policy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(denial, has quality bad)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(defense mechanism, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(denial, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(defense mechanism, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(behavior, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(policy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.51
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(defense mechanism, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(behavior, has quality bad)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(policy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(rejection, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(rejection, feel good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(rejection, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(rejection, hurt bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(hypocrisy, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(hypocrisy, has quality wrong)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(rejection, feel bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(hypocrisy, is bad thing)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(behavior, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(denial, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(policy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(denial, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(defense mechanism, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(denial, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(hypocrisy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(hypocrisy, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(rejection, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(rejection, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(rejection, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(rejection, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(hypocrisy, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(hypocrisy, has quality wrong)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(rejection, feel bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(rejection, feel bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(hypocrisy, is bad thing) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(hypocrisy, is bad thing)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(rejection, feel good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(rejection, feel good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
Remarkable(rejection, hurt bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(rejection, hurt bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(denial, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Salient(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(denial, has quality good)
0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(denial, has quality good)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality good)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(denial, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Salient(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(denial, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(defense mechanism, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(policy, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(behavior, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(rejection, has quality good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(hypocrisy, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(hypocrisy, is bad thing)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(hypocrisy, has quality wrong)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(rejection, feel bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(rejection, feel good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(rejection, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(rejection, hurt bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(defense mechanism, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(policy, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Typical(denial, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(behavior, has quality bad)