discussion: has quality good

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
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality worth 0.85
has quality service 0.81
CAN good 0.81
have bad reputation 0.77
is good show 0.76
has quality definition 0.76
has quality questions 0.76
be made better 0.75

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

0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agenda, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(dialogue, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(agenda, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(agenda, has quality definition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(agenda, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(plan, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(agenda, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(dialogue, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(agenda, has quality definition)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(agenda, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(dialogue, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(agenda, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(plan, has quality good)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(agenda, has quality definition)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(lecture, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(seminar, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(meeting, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(meeting, have bad reputation)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(forum, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(forum, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(seminar, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(meeting, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(lecture, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(meeting, be made better)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(lecture, has quality definition)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(seminar, has quality definition)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(seminar, has quality worth)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(seminar, has quality questions)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(agenda, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(discussion, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(plan, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(discussion, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(dialogue, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(discussion, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(agenda, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(discussion, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(agenda, has quality definition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(discussion, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(lecture, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(lecture, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(meeting, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(meeting, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(seminar, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(seminar, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(forum, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(forum, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(meeting, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(meeting, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(forum, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(forum, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(lecture, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(lecture, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(seminar, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(seminar, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(seminar, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(seminar, has quality worth)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(seminar, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(seminar, has quality questions)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(lecture, has quality definition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(lecture, has quality definition)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(seminar, has quality definition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(seminar, has quality definition)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(meeting, be made better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(meeting, be made better)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(meeting, have bad reputation) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(meeting, have bad reputation)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(discussion, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality questions)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(discussion, has quality questions)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(discussion, has quality questions)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality questions)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Salient(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(discussion, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(agenda, has quality definition)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(agenda, has quality bad)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(agenda, has quality good)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(dialogue, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(seminar, has quality worth)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(seminar, has quality questions)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lecture, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(meeting, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(lecture, has quality definition)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(meeting, be made better)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(seminar, has quality definition)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(seminar, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(meeting, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(lecture, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(seminar, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(meeting, have bad reputation)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(forum, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(forum, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(plan, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(agenda, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(agenda, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(dialogue, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(discussion, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(agenda, has quality definition)