habitat: be with biodiversity stable

Property	Similarity
be with biodiversity stable	1.00
be with biodiversity more stable	0.99
be with high biodiversity stable	0.98
be with high biodiversity more stable	0.97
be with biodiversity	0.93
be with high biodiversity	0.93
biodiversity division threats	0.83
has state ecology	0.77
be important to ecosystem	0.77
be prevalent natural vegetation of central low lands	0.76

0.72

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity)

0.72

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.99

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity more stable)

0.70

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Typical(habitat, be with high biodiversity more stable)

0.70

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.85

¬ Typical(habitat, be with high biodiversity stable)

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.99

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity more stable)

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.99

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity more stable)

0.66

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Salient(habitat, be with high biodiversity more stable)

0.66

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Plausible(habitat, be with high biodiversity more stable)

0.66

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.99

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.37

¬ Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity more stable)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(habitat, be with high biodiversity)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.36

¬ Remarkable(habitat, be with high biodiversity more stable)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Plausible(habitat, be with high biodiversity stable)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(habitat, be with high biodiversity stable)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.98

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Salient(habitat, be with high biodiversity stable)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Typical(habitat, biodiversity division threats)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.38

¬ Salient(habitat, biodiversity division threats)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.51

¬ Plausible(habitat, biodiversity division threats)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.30

¬ Remarkable(habitat, biodiversity division threats)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Plausible(habitat, be with high biodiversity)

0.56

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

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(habitat, be important to ecosystem)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(habitat, has state ecology)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Salient(habitat, be with high biodiversity)

0.49

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Remarkable(habitat, be with high biodiversity)

0.49

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Plausible(habitat, has state ecology)

0.49

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Plausible(habitat, be important to ecosystem)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Remarkable(habitat, has state ecology)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Salient(habitat, has state ecology)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Salient(habitat, be important to ecosystem)

0.40

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(habitat, be with biodiversity stable) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Remarkable(habitat, be important to ecosystem)

Parents	factor Weight: 0.62 , activity Weight: 0.56 , structure Weight: 0.55 , charity Weight: 0.55
Siblings	grassland Weight: 0.73 , wetland Weight: 0.71 , pond Weight: 0.65 , freshwater Weight: 0.65 , marsh Weight: 0.64

habitat: be with biodiversity stable

Related concepts

Related properties

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

Salient implies Plausible

Similarity expansion

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

Typical implies Plausible

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings