frog: be considered amphibians

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
, wild animal
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 considered amphibians 1.00
be called amphibians 0.98
is amphibians 0.98
be know as amphibians 0.96
be different from amphibians 0.95
be classified as amphibians 0.95
be said amphibians 0.95
be different from other amphibians 0.93
belong to amphibians 0.92
be amphibians in australia 0.87

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

0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(amphibian, be called amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(frog, be considered amphibians)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(amphibian, be called amphibians)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(amphibian, be called amphibians)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(toad, is amphibians)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(amphibian, be called amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
Remarkable(toad, is amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(toad, is amphibians)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(frog, be considered amphibians)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(frog, is amphibians)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(frog, is amphibians)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.29
Salient(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Salient(frog, is amphibians)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(frog, be called amphibians)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(frog, be called amphibians)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.29
Salient(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Salient(frog, be called amphibians)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(frog, be called amphibians)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(frog, is amphibians)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.29
Salient(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(frog, be considered amphibians)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(amphibian, be called amphibians)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(toad, is amphibians)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(frog, be considered amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(amphibian, be called amphibians)