gathering: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents meeting
Weight: 0.67
, event
Weight: 0.65
, function
Weight: 0.57
, day
Weight: 0.54
Siblings birthday party
Weight: 0.71
, picnic
Weight: 0.66
, retreat
Weight: 0.63
, convention
Weight: 0.61
, conference
Weight: 0.61

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality wrong 0.87
has quality worth 0.82
CAN good 0.78
has quality difference 0.77
is later quality 0.76
sound terrible 0.76
has quality definition 0.75
has quality jokes 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(meeting, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(function, has quality difference) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(day, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Plausible(day, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(meeting, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(function, has quality difference)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.55
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(day, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(meeting, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(function, has quality difference)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(conference, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(retreat, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(convention, has quality jokes)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(conference, has quality definition)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(meeting, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(gathering, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(day, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(gathering, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(function, has quality difference) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(gathering, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(retreat, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(retreat, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(conference, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(conference, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(conference, has quality definition) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(conference, has quality definition)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(convention, has quality jokes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(convention, has quality jokes)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(gathering, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(gathering, has quality wrong)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality wrong)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality wrong)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(gathering, has quality wrong)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality worth)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(gathering, has quality worth)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(gathering, has quality worth)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality worth)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(gathering, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(day, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(meeting, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(function, has quality difference)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(conference, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(retreat, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(conference, has quality definition)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(convention, has quality jokes)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(day, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(meeting, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(gathering, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(function, has quality difference)