desertification: has state problem

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents problem
Weight: 0.62
, issue
Weight: 0.58
, factor
Weight: 0.53
, effect
Weight: 0.53
, crisis
Weight: 0.52
Siblings erosion
Weight: 0.34
, biodiversity
Weight: 0.34
, overpopulation
Weight: 0.33
, hunger
Weight: 0.33
, illiteracy
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state problem 1.00
is problem brainly 0.93
is serious problem 0.86
is global problem 0.84
has state concern 0.84
create problems 0.78
create problems for environment 0.75

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

0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(issue, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(desertification, has state problem)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(issue, has state problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(issue, has state problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(hunger, has state problem)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(overpopulation, has state problem)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(illiteracy, has state problem)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(erosion, has state problem)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(overpopulation, has state concern)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(overpopulation, is global problem)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(issue, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(desertification, has state problem)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(hunger, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(hunger, has state problem)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(overpopulation, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(overpopulation, has state problem)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(illiteracy, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(illiteracy, has state problem)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(erosion, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(erosion, has state problem)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(overpopulation, has state concern) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(overpopulation, has state concern)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
Remarkable(overpopulation, is global problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(overpopulation, is global problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(desertification, has state problem)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(desertification, is problem brainly)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(desertification, is problem brainly)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Salient(desertification, is problem brainly)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(desertification, is problem brainly)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(desertification, is global problem)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Salient(desertification, is global problem)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(desertification, is global problem)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(desertification, is serious problem)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(desertification, has state concern)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(desertification, is global problem)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(desertification, create problems)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(desertification, has state concern)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(desertification, has state concern)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Salient(desertification, is serious problem)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(desertification, create problems)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state concern)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(desertification, is serious problem)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(desertification, is serious problem)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Salient(desertification, create problems)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(desertification, create problems)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(desertification, create problems for environment)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(desertification, create problems for environment)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(desertification, create problems for environment)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(desertification, create problems for environment)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(desertification, has state problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(issue, has state problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(hunger, has state problem)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(overpopulation, has state problem)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(illiteracy, has state problem)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(erosion, has state problem)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(overpopulation, has state concern)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(overpopulation, is global problem)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Typical(desertification, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(issue, has state problem)