homeless shelter: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents shelter
Weight: 0.70
, charity
Weight: 0.68
, organization
Weight: 0.67
, location
Weight: 0.67
, service
Weight: 0.65
Siblings apartment building
Weight: 0.34
, hospital care
Weight: 0.34
, escort service
Weight: 0.34
, service station
Weight: 0.34
, orphanage
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
is quality 0.87
be bad in bulgaria 0.87
has quality wrong 0.87
has quality change 0.86
has quality systems 0.78
has quality services 0.77
be good for business 0.76
be in bad weather 0.76

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

0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(shelter, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(charity, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(location, be good for business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(location, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(location, has quality services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(shelter, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(charity, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(location, has quality wrong)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(service, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(service, is quality)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(shelter, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(location, has quality services)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(location, be good for business)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(shelter, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(location, has quality wrong)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(shelter, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(service, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(charity, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(service, is quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(location, be good for business)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(location, has quality services)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(orphanage, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(shelter, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(charity, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(location, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(location, be good for business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(location, has quality services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(orphanage, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(orphanage, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(homeless shelter, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality good)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(homeless shelter, has quality good)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality good)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Salient(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(shelter, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(charity, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(service, is quality)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(shelter, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(location, has quality wrong)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(location, has quality services)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(location, be good for business)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(orphanage, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(shelter, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(charity, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(shelter, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(service, is quality)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(location, has quality wrong)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(location, has quality services)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(homeless shelter, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(location, be good for business)