funnel: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.55
, item
Weight: 0.51
, object
Weight: 0.51
, apparatus
Weight: 0.45
, container
Weight: 0.42
Siblings drain
Weight: 0.31
, push button
Weight: 0.31
, pump
Weight: 0.31
, lure
Weight: 0.31
, dump truck
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality question 0.77

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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(drain, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(pump, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(pump, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(pump, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(drain, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(drain, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(funnel, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(funnel, has quality question)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(funnel, has quality question)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(funnel, has quality question)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(funnel, has quality question)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(funnel, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(funnel, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(drain, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(funnel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(pump, has quality good)