geeks: have bad taste

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents tv show
Weight: 0.59
, show
Weight: 0.58
, television show
Weight: 0.48
, television
Weight: 0.45
, film
Weight: 0.44
Siblings geek
Weight: 0.36
, smallville
Weight: 0.34
, spongebob squarepants
Weight: 0.33
, sherlock holmes
Weight: 0.32
, simpsons
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
have bad taste 1.00
have taste 0.95
has quality bad 0.82
has quality good 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(television, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(geeks, have bad taste)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(television, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(geeks, have bad taste)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(film, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(geeks, have bad taste)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(television, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(film, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(television, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(television, has quality bad)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(television, has quality good)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(film, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(smallville, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(sherlock holmes, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(simpsons, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(simpsons, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(smallville, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(television, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(geeks, have bad taste)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(television, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(geeks, have bad taste)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(film, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(geeks, have bad taste)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(simpsons, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(simpsons, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(smallville, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(smallville, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(smallville, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(smallville, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(simpsons, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(simpsons, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(sherlock holmes, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(sherlock holmes, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(geeks, have bad taste)

Similarity expansion

0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.44
Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(geeks, have taste)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(geeks, have taste)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Salient(geeks, have taste)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have taste)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(geeks, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(geeks, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(geeks, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(geeks, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.44
Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(geeks, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(geeks, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.44
Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(geeks, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(geeks, have bad taste)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.14
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(film, has quality good)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(smallville, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(smallville, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(sherlock holmes, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(simpsons, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(simpsons, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.44
Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(film, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.44
Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality bad)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.44
Typical(geeks, have bad taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality good)