design software: requires fully understand problem domain

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents -
Siblings -

Related properties

Property Similarity
requires fully understand problem domain 1.00
requires study problem domain carefully 0.89
requires understand problem 0.85
requires discipline domain knowledge and design experience 0.80
requires analyze problem first 0.77
be motivated by solve problem 0.77
causes wrong problem to be solve 0.77
be used to solve problem 0.76
causes help solve problem 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

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(design software, requires study problem domain carefully)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Salient(design software, requires study problem domain carefully)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(design software, requires study problem domain carefully)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Plausible(design software, requires understand problem)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(design software, requires understand problem)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Salient(design software, causes help solve problem)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Plausible(design software, requires discipline domain knowledge and design experience)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Salient(design software, be motivated by solve problem)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(design software, requires analyze problem first)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(design software, be motivated by solve problem)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(design software, causes help solve problem)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Salient(design software, be used to solve problem)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Salient(design software, requires analyze problem first)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(design software, be used to solve problem)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(design software, be motivated by solve problem)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(design software, requires discipline domain knowledge and design experience)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(design software, causes help solve problem)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(design software, be used to solve problem)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(design software, requires understand problem)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(design software, requires analyze problem first)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(design software, requires discipline domain knowledge and design experience)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(design software, requires understand problem)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(design software, requires discipline domain knowledge and design experience)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(design software, be used to solve problem)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(design software, requires analyze problem first)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(design software, be motivated by solve problem)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(design software, requires study problem domain carefully)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(design software, causes help solve problem)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(design software, requires fully understand problem domain)