grinding: has quality better

Related concepts

Parents	method Weight: 0.58 , operation Weight: 0.58 , thing Weight: 0.54 , activity Weight: 0.51 , process Weight: 0.50
Siblings	rolling Weight: 0.32 , groove Weight: 0.32 , extraction Weight: 0.32 , time machine Weight: 0.32 , grinder Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality better	1.00
has quality bad	0.90
has quality change	0.86

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.46

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Typical(grinding, has quality better)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.28

¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Remarkable(extraction, has quality better)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Plausible(grinding, has quality better)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

Remarkable(extraction, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(extraction, has quality better)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.28

Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Plausible(rolling, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Salient(grinding, has quality better)

Similarity expansion

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.79

Typical(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.64

¬ Typical(grinding, has quality bad)

0.66

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.79

Typical(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Typical(grinding, has quality change)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.72

Salient(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.42

¬ Salient(grinding, has quality change)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.42

¬ Plausible(grinding, has quality change)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.66

¬ Plausible(grinding, has quality bad)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.72

Salient(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Salient(grinding, has quality bad)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.48

Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality change)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.48

Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

Salient(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Typical(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Typical(grinding, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.28

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(extraction, has quality better)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.36

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.90

Evidence: 0.79

Typical(grinding, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)