frog: be beneficial to man

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents reptile
Weight: 0.78
, creature
Weight: 0.72
, tree frog
Weight: 0.65
, amphibian
Weight: 0.64
Siblings lizard
Weight: 0.40
, turtle
Weight: 0.39
, toad
Weight: 0.39
, saltwater crocodile
Weight: 0.38
, otter
Weight: 0.38

Related properties

Property Similarity
be beneficial to man 1.00
be harmful to man 0.88

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

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(toad, be beneficial to man)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(toad, be harmful to man)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(lizard, be beneficial to man)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(lizard, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(lizard, be beneficial to man)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(toad, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(toad, be beneficial to man)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(toad, be harmful to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(toad, be harmful to man)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(frog, be beneficial to man)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(frog, be harmful to man)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.95
Typical(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(frog, be harmful to man)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(frog, be harmful to man)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(frog, be harmful to man)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(frog, be beneficial to man)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(toad, be beneficial to man)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(toad, be harmful to man)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(frog, be beneficial to man) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(lizard, be beneficial to man)