dog poop: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.63
, problem
Weight: 0.56
Siblings poop
Weight: 0.37
, dog food
Weight: 0.37
, puppy
Weight: 0.36
, beagle
Weight: 0.35
, animal fat
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
be bad for environment 0.80

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

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(animal fat, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(dog food, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(poop, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(animal fat, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(animal fat, has quality bad)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(poop, has quality bad)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(dog food, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(dog food, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(dog poop, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(dog poop, be bad for environment)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(dog poop, be bad for environment)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(dog poop, be bad for environment)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, be bad for environment)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(dog poop, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(animal fat, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(poop, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(dog poop, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(dog food, has quality bad)