firm: exist despite issue of competition

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents law firm
Weight: 0.81
, financial institution
Weight: 0.61
, institution
Weight: 0.58
, member
Weight: 0.57
Siblings software company
Weight: 0.70
, ubs
Weight: 0.64
, vanguard
Weight: 0.58
, boeing
Weight: 0.57
, renault
Weight: 0.57

Related properties

Property Similarity
exist despite issue of competition 1.00
exist despite issue 0.93
avoid competition 0.81
engage in price competition 0.78
compete within competitive market considered 0.77
aviod competition 0.77
compete within market considered 0.76
compete within competitive market 0.76
compete within perfectly competitive market considered 0.76
exist 0.76

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

0.31
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(institution, exist) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(institution, exist)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.20
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(institution, exist)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(institution, exist) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(firm, exist despite issue of competition)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(firm, exist)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(firm, exist)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(firm, engage in price competition)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(firm, compete within perfectly competitive market considered)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(firm, exist)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(firm, exist)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(firm, engage in price competition)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(firm, compete within perfectly competitive market considered)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(firm, engage in price competition)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(firm, compete within perfectly competitive market considered)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(firm, engage in price competition)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(firm, compete within perfectly competitive market considered)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(institution, exist)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(firm, exist despite issue of competition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(institution, exist)