hacker: use attacks

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents criminal
Weight: 0.63
, outsider
Weight: 0.63
, person
Weight: 0.57
, third party
Weight: 0.57
, individual
Weight: 0.55
Siblings spammer
Weight: 0.33
, pickpocket
Weight: 0.32
, terrorist
Weight: 0.32
, thief
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
use attacks 1.00
do ddos attacks 0.96
attack 0.87
commit cyber attacks 0.84

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

0.01
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.08
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(terrorist, attack)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(terrorist, attack) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(terrorist, attack)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Salient(hacker, use attacks)

Similarity expansion

0.82
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(hacker, do ddos attacks)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.47
Salient(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Salient(hacker, do ddos attacks)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(hacker, do ddos attacks)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(hacker, attack)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(hacker, commit cyber attacks)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.47
Salient(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(hacker, attack)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.03
Typical(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(hacker, do ddos attacks)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(hacker, attack)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.47
Salient(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(hacker, commit cyber attacks)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.03
Typical(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(hacker, attack)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(hacker, commit cyber attacks)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.03
Typical(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(hacker, commit cyber attacks)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Salient(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(hacker, use attacks)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(hacker, use attacks)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(hacker, use attacks) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(terrorist, attack)