design: be important deciding

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents cost
Weight: 0.64
, industry
Weight: 0.63
, approach
Weight: 0.63
, layout
Weight: 0.62
Siblings architect
Weight: 0.71
, design pattern
Weight: 0.69
, prototype
Weight: 0.63
, chevron
Weight: 0.62
, logo
Weight: 0.62

Related properties

Property Similarity
be important deciding 1.00
be important in theatre 0.77
be important 40 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

0.31
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(industry, be important 40) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(design, be important deciding)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(industry, be important 40)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(industry, be important 40)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(industry, be important 40) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(design, be important deciding)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(design, be important deciding)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Salient(design, be important in theatre)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(design, be important in theatre)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(design, be important in theatre)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(design, be important in theatre)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(design, be important deciding)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(design, be important deciding)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(industry, be important 40)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(design, be important deciding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(industry, be important 40)