discussion: be in circle ironic

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents dialogue
Weight: 0.66
, agenda
Weight: 0.63
, community
Weight: 0.63
, plan
Weight: 0.62
, event
Weight: 0.62
Siblings forum
Weight: 0.67
, lecture
Weight: 0.59
, topic
Weight: 0.34
, meeting
Weight: 0.34
, seminar
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in circle ironic 1.00
is ironic 0.88
be in missionary circle ironic 0.86
be in circle 0.86

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(topic, is ironic)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(topic, is ironic)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(topic, is ironic)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(discussion, be in circle ironic)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Plausible(discussion, be in missionary circle ironic)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(discussion, be in circle)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.84
Typical(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(discussion, be in circle)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.84
Typical(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(discussion, be in missionary circle ironic)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(discussion, be in circle)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(discussion, be in missionary circle ironic)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(discussion, be in missionary circle ironic)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(discussion, be in circle)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(discussion, be in circle ironic)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.97
Plausible(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(discussion, be in circle ironic)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(discussion, be in circle ironic)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(topic, is ironic)