helping: was good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents organization
Weight: 0.37
, day
Weight: 0.29
, problem
Weight: 0.28
, help
Weight: 0.28
, everyone
Weight: 0.21
Siblings charity
Weight: 0.26
, homeless shelter
Weight: 0.26
, task force
Weight: 0.26
, family member
Weight: 0.26

Related properties

Property Similarity
was good 1.00
has quality good 0.84
is bad idea 0.78

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

0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(day, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(helping, was good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(day, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(day, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(charity, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(day, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(helping, was good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(charity, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(charity, has quality good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.24
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(helping, was good)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(helping, has quality good)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(helping, has quality good)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(helping, has quality good)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(helping, is bad idea)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(helping, is bad idea)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(helping, is bad idea)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(helping, is bad idea)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(helping, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(helping, was good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(day, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(charity, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.97
Typical(helping, was good)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(day, has quality good)