flea: be bad for humans

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents insect
Weight: 0.58
, parasite
Weight: 0.58
, item
Weight: 0.56
, problem
Weight: 0.55
, cat
Weight: 0.52
Siblings gypsy moth
Weight: 0.33
, dog food
Weight: 0.32
, black cat
Weight: 0.32
, ladybug
Weight: 0.32
, honey bee
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be bad for humans 1.00
get on humans 0.92
live on humans 0.88
bite certain humans 0.84
benefit humans 0.84
jump on humans 0.84
bite humans 0.83
attack humans 0.81
suck blood from animals 0.75

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: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(dog food, be bad for humans)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
Remarkable(dog food, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(dog food, be bad for humans)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(flea, be bad for humans)

Similarity expansion

0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(flea, get on humans)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(flea, get on humans)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(flea, get on humans)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(flea, live on humans)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(flea, live on humans)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(flea, be bad for humans)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(flea, be bad for humans)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(flea, be bad for humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(dog food, be bad for humans)