digital camera: lag in conditions

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents electronic device
Weight: 0.76
, computer hardware
Weight: 0.73
, photograph
Weight: 0.73
, camera
Weight: 0.62
Siblings mobile phone
Weight: 0.73
, computer
Weight: 0.71
, floppy disk
Weight: 0.64
, scanner
Weight: 0.63
, video
Weight: 0.62

Related properties

Property Similarity
lag in conditions 1.00
lag in light conditions 0.98
lag in low conditions 0.98
lag in low light conditions 0.95

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: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Salient(digital camera, lag in conditions)

Similarity expansion

0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(digital camera, lag in low conditions)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.03
Salient(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Salient(digital camera, lag in low conditions)
0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, lag in low conditions)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Plausible(digital camera, lag in low light conditions)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, lag in low light conditions)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.03
Salient(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Salient(digital camera, lag in low light conditions)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(digital camera, lag in low conditions)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, lag in light conditions)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.03
Salient(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Salient(digital camera, lag in light conditions)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(digital camera, lag in light conditions)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(digital camera, lag in low light conditions)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(digital camera, lag in light conditions)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Salient(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, lag in conditions)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(digital camera, lag in conditions)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(digital camera, lag in conditions)