hold: have poor sound quality

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
have poor sound quality 1.00
have poor quality 0.94
have sound quality 0.93
is poor quality 0.93
sound bad 0.88
is bad quality 0.86
has quality bad 0.85
has sound sound 0.85
have quality 0.85
sound terrible 0.85

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

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(lock, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(stand, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(stand, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(stand, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(lock, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(lock, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(hold, have poor sound quality)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor quality)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(hold, sound bad)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.25
Typical(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(hold, have sound quality)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(hold, have sound quality)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(hold, have poor sound quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(stand, has quality bad)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(lock, has quality bad)