hold: be terrible in 2016

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents feature
Weight: 0.59
, service
Weight: 0.56
, place
Weight: 0.55
, option
Weight: 0.51
, condition
Weight: 0.50
Siblings other place
Weight: 0.33
, stand
Weight: 0.32
, lock
Weight: 0.31
, hinge
Weight: 0.31
, roll
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be terrible in 2016 1.00
is terrible quality 0.94
sound terrible 0.90
is bad quality 0.77
sound terribly bad 0.77
has quality bad 0.77

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

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(lock, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(stand, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(stand, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(stand, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(lock, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(lock, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)

Similarity expansion

0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(hold, is terrible quality)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(hold, sound terrible)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(hold, sound terrible)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(hold, sound terrible)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(hold, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(hold, sound terribly bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(hold, is terrible quality)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(hold, is bad quality)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Salient(hold, sound terrible)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(hold, sound terribly bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(hold, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(hold, sound terribly bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(hold, is terrible quality)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(hold, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(hold, is bad quality)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(hold, sound terribly bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(hold, is bad quality)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(hold, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(hold, is terrible quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(hold, is bad quality)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(hold, be terrible in 2016)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(stand, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(hold, be terrible in 2016)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(lock, has quality bad)