flash memory: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents random access memory
Weight: 0.78
, memory
Weight: 0.72
, disk drive
Weight: 0.71
, device
Weight: 0.68
Siblings disk
Weight: 0.36
, floppy disk
Weight: 0.35
, computer disk
Weight: 0.35
, laptop computer
Weight: 0.35
, computer keyboard
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality better 0.94
has quality full 0.84
is hard important 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

0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(disk drive, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(disk drive, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(device, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flash memory, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(memory, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(device, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(disk drive, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(disk drive, has quality better)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(memory, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(disk drive, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(device, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(disk drive, has quality better)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(disk, has quality full)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(disk, is hard important)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(device, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(disk drive, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(disk drive, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(disk, has quality full)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(disk, has quality full)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(disk, is hard important)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(disk, is hard important)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(flash memory, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flash memory, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(memory, has quality good)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(device, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(disk drive, has quality bad)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(disk drive, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(disk, has quality full)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(disk, is hard important)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(memory, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(device, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(disk drive, has quality bad)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(flash memory, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(disk drive, has quality better)