hold: is poor 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
is poor quality 1.00
have poor quality 0.99
have poor sound quality 0.93
is bad quality 0.89
has quality bad 0.88
is quality 0.86
is low quality 0.85
is terrible quality 0.84
have quality 0.84
have sound quality 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(hold, is poor quality)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(service, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.23
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(service, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(lock, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(stand, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(hold, is poor quality)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(stand, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(stand, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
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: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(hold, is poor quality)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(hold, have poor quality)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(hold, have poor sound quality)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(hold, have poor quality)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(hold, have poor quality)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(hold, have poor sound quality)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(hold, have poor sound quality)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(hold, have quality)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(hold, is bad quality)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(hold, has quality bad)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(hold, is quality)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(hold, is bad quality)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(hold, has quality bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(hold, have quality)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(hold, is bad quality)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(hold, has quality bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(hold, have quality)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(hold, is quality)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(hold, have sound quality)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(hold, is quality)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(hold, is terrible quality)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(hold, is low quality)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(hold, is terrible quality)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(hold, is low quality)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(hold, is terrible quality)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(hold, have sound quality)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor quality)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(hold, is low quality)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(hold, have sound quality)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(hold, is bad quality)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(hold, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(hold, have poor sound quality)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(hold, is terrible quality)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(hold, is low quality)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(hold, is quality)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(hold, have quality)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(hold, have sound quality)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(hold, is poor quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(service, is quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(stand, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(lock, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(hold, is poor quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(service, is quality)