gum: be bad for environment

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents candy
Weight: 0.68
, thing
Weight: 0.62
, chewing gum
Weight: 0.60
, product
Weight: 0.58
Siblings acacia
Weight: 0.65
, milk chocolate
Weight: 0.35
, cotton candy
Weight: 0.35
, rock candy
Weight: 0.35
, lollipop
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
be bad for environment 1.00
has quality bad 0.80

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

0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(chewing gum, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(gum, be bad for environment)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(chewing gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(gum, be bad for environment)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(candy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(gum, be bad for environment)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(candy, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(chewing gum, be bad for environment)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(chewing gum, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.53
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(chewing gum, be bad for environment)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(candy, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(chewing gum, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(chewing gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(gum, be bad for environment)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(chewing gum, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(gum, be bad for environment)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(candy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(gum, be bad for environment)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Salient(gum, be bad for environment)

Similarity expansion

0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(gum, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(gum, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(gum, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.43
Salient(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(gum, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Salient(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(gum, be bad for environment)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(chewing gum, be bad for environment)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(candy, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(chewing gum, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(chewing gum, be bad for environment)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(candy, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(gum, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(chewing gum, has quality bad)