georgia: was unique

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents alabama
Weight: 0.64
, school
Weight: 0.62
, florida
Weight: 0.62
, republic
Weight: 0.61
Siblings tennessee
Weight: 0.36
, california
Weight: 0.35
, missouri
Weight: 0.35
, kentucky
Weight: 0.35
, mississippi
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
was unique 1.00
is unique 0.97

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

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(kentucky, is unique)
0.01
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.11
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(mississippi, is unique)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
Remarkable(mississippi, is unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(mississippi, is unique)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
Remarkable(kentucky, is unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(kentucky, is unique)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(georgia, was unique)

Similarity expansion

0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(georgia, is unique)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.09
Typical(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(georgia, is unique)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(georgia, is unique)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(georgia, is unique)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(georgia, was unique)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(georgia, was unique)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(mississippi, is unique)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(georgia, was unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(kentucky, is unique)