design: has quality good

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
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality better 0.94
has quality worth 0.85
has quality standard 0.83
is great 0.81
is really best 0.80
has quality function 0.78
has quality evil 0.78
is good job 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

0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(approach, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(design, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(industry, has quality standard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(design, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(cost, has quality function) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(design, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(approach, has quality better)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(industry, has quality standard)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(cost, has quality function)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(approach, has quality better)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(industry, has quality standard)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(cost, has quality function)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(design pattern, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(prototype, has quality evil)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(prototype, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(chevron, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(chevron, is really best)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(logo, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(chevron, has quality worth)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(architect, is good job)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(logo, is great)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(approach, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(design, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(industry, has quality standard) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(design, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(cost, has quality function) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(design, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(logo, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(logo, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(prototype, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(prototype, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(chevron, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(chevron, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(design pattern, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(design pattern, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(chevron, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(chevron, has quality worth)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(logo, is great) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(logo, is great)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
Remarkable(prototype, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(prototype, has quality evil)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(chevron, is really best) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(chevron, is really best)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(architect, is good job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(architect, is good job)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(design, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(design, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(cost, has quality function)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Typical(industry, has quality standard)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(approach, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(prototype, has quality evil)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(design pattern, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(logo, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(chevron, has quality worth)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(prototype, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(logo, is great)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(chevron, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(architect, is good job)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(chevron, is really best)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(approach, has quality better)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(cost, has quality function)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(design, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Typical(industry, has quality standard)