induction: have recruitment process

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents method
Weight: 0.63
, process
Weight: 0.61
, honor
Weight: 0.58
, intervention
Weight: 0.53
, heating element
Weight: 0.53
Siblings hydrolysis
Weight: 0.32
, combustion
Weight: 0.31
, diffusion
Weight: 0.31
, recognition
Weight: 0.31
, award
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
have recruitment process 1.00
be important in process 0.78
be called process 0.77
has physical part process 0.77
be considered process 0.77
evaluation of be can ongoing process 0.76
evaluation of be can process 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

0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(process, evaluation of be can ongoing process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(induction, have recruitment process)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(process, evaluation of be can process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(induction, have recruitment process)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(process, evaluation of be can process)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(process, evaluation of be can ongoing process)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(process, evaluation of be can ongoing process)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(process, evaluation of be can process)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(combustion, has physical part process)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(diffusion, has physical part process)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(process, evaluation of be can ongoing process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(induction, have recruitment process)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(process, evaluation of be can process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(induction, have recruitment process)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
Remarkable(diffusion, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(diffusion, has physical part process)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(combustion, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(combustion, has physical part process)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(induction, have recruitment process)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
Salient(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(induction, have recruitment process)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(process, evaluation of be can process)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(process, evaluation of be can ongoing process)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(diffusion, has physical part process)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(combustion, has physical part process)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.19
Typical(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(process, evaluation of be can process)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.19
Typical(induction, have recruitment process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(process, evaluation of be can ongoing process)