drug use: be in sports problem

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents activity
Weight: 0.66
, risk
Weight: 0.66
, crime
Weight: 0.66
Siblings cigarette smoking
Weight: 0.69
, meth
Weight: 0.69
, methamphetamine
Weight: 0.67
, sexual activity
Weight: 0.66
, alcohol
Weight: 0.63

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in sports problem 1.00
be in sports 0.89
has state problem 0.84
is social problem 0.82

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

0.40
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(crime, has state problem)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(crime, is social problem)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(crime, is social problem)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(crime, has state problem)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(crime, has state problem)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(crime, is social problem)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(crime, has state problem)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.22
Plausible(crime, is social problem)
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(drug use, be in sports problem)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.46
Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(drug use, is social problem)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.46
Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(drug use, be in sports)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(drug use, be in sports)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(drug use, is social problem)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.46
Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(drug use, has state problem)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(drug use, be in sports)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(drug use, has state problem)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(drug use, be in sports)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(drug use, is social problem)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(drug use, has state problem)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(drug use, has state problem)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(drug use, is social problem)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(crime, is social problem)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(crime, has state problem)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.46
Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(crime, is social problem)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.46
Typical(drug use, be in sports problem)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(crime, has state problem)