dialogue: be in movies

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents strategy
Weight: 0.62
, work
Weight: 0.60
, exchange
Weight: 0.60
, conversation
Weight: 0.59
Siblings discussion
Weight: 0.66
, republic
Weight: 0.59
, parmenides
Weight: 0.48
, framework
Weight: 0.33
, partnership
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in movies 1.00
be low in movies 0.92
be quiet in movies 0.90
driving in movies 0.86
be in pre-1970 's film 0.85
be used in film 0.84
be important in film 0.83
be in pornos 0.80
have two music videos 0.78
be in pornos dumb 0.78

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

0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.27
Plausible(conversation, be in pornos)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(conversation, be in pornos dumb)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(dialogue, be in movies)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(conversation, be in pornos)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(conversation, be in pornos dumb)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(conversation, be in pornos)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(conversation, be in pornos dumb)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.27
Plausible(conversation, be in pornos)
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(conversation, be in pornos dumb)
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Salient(dialogue, be in movies)

Similarity expansion

0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be low in movies)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be quiet in movies)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be quiet in movies)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be low in movies)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Salient(dialogue, be quiet in movies)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Salient(dialogue, be low in movies)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(dialogue, be quiet in movies)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(dialogue, be low in movies)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be in pre-1970 's film)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Salient(dialogue, be in pre-1970 's film)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be in pre-1970 's film)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be used in film)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be important in film)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(dialogue, be in pre-1970 's film)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(dialogue, be used in film)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be used in film)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(dialogue, be used in film)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.16
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(dialogue, be important in film)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.07
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(dialogue, be important in film)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.03
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(dialogue, be important in film)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(dialogue, be in movies)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(conversation, be in pornos)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(conversation, be in pornos dumb)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(conversation, be in pornos)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.14
Typical(dialogue, be in movies)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(conversation, be in pornos dumb)