duck: have webbed feet

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents fowl
Weight: 0.66
, bird
Weight: 0.65
, dish
Weight: 0.60
Siblings goldeneye
Weight: 0.64
, mallard
Weight: 0.60
, coot
Weight: 0.58
, snow goose
Weight: 0.56

Related properties

Property Similarity
have webbed feet 1.00
have orange feet 0.83
has physical part feet 0.80
have flat feet 0.79

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

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(mallard, have orange feet)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(mallard, has physical part feet)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(coot, has physical part feet)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
Remarkable(mallard, have orange feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(mallard, have orange feet)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(mallard, has physical part feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(mallard, has physical part feet)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(coot, has physical part feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Plausible(coot, has physical part feet)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(duck, have webbed feet)

Similarity expansion

0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(duck, has physical part feet)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Salient(duck, has physical part feet)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(duck, has physical part feet)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.39
Typical(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(duck, has physical part feet)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(duck, have webbed feet)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(mallard, has physical part feet)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Typical(mallard, have orange feet)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(duck, have webbed feet) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(coot, has physical part feet)