induction: is cooking better

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
is cooking better 1.00
is cooking good 0.97
is cooking 0.95
is cooking better than gas 0.93
be in cooking native delicacies 0.80

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

0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(process, be in cooking native delicacies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(induction, is cooking better)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(process, be in cooking native delicacies)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(process, be in cooking native delicacies)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(process, be in cooking native delicacies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(induction, is cooking better)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Salient(induction, is cooking better)

Similarity expansion

0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(induction, is cooking)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Salient(induction, is cooking)
0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(induction, is cooking)
0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Salient(induction, is cooking better than gas)
0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(induction, is cooking better than gas)
0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(induction, is cooking better than gas)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(induction, is cooking good)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(induction, is cooking good)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Salient(induction, is cooking good)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.23
Typical(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(induction, is cooking)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.23
Typical(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(induction, is cooking better than gas)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.23
Typical(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(induction, is cooking good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(induction, is cooking better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(induction, is cooking better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(process, be in cooking native delicacies)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.14
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.23
Typical(induction, is cooking better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(process, be in cooking native delicacies)