grant: was involved in black friday

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents agreement
Weight: 0.66
, benefit
Weight: 0.61
, fee
Weight: 0.61
, tool
Weight: 0.60
, part
Weight: 0.60
Siblings application
Weight: 0.33
, contract
Weight: 0.32
, reimbursement
Weight: 0.32
, stipulation
Weight: 0.32
, first aid kit
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
was involved in black friday 1.00
was involved in friday 0.97
has color black 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

0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(part, has color black) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(grant, was involved in black friday)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(part, has color black)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(part, has color black)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(part, has color black) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(grant, was involved in black friday)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Salient(grant, was involved in black friday)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(grant, was involved in friday)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(grant, was involved in friday)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(grant, was involved in friday)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(grant, was involved in friday)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(grant, was involved in black friday)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(grant, was involved in black friday)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(part, has color black)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(grant, was involved in black friday) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(part, has color black)