insurance: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents financial institution
Weight: 0.64
, operating expense
Weight: 0.62
, sector
Weight: 0.60
, condition
Weight: 0.60
, payment
Weight: 0.59
Siblings mortgage lender
Weight: 0.35
, automobile industry
Weight: 0.34
, online banking
Weight: 0.33
, banking
Weight: 0.33
, health
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
has quality right 0.88
has quality system 0.82
has quality worth 0.82
has quality news 0.80
is bad people 0.80
quality of life 0.79
be related quality of life important 0.79

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

0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(sector, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(insurance, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(sector, has quality news) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(insurance, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(operating expense, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(insurance, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(operating expense, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(sector, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(sector, has quality news)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(sector, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(operating expense, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(sector, has quality news)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(health, be related quality of life important)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality better)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(health, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality better)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(health, quality of life)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(health, has quality system)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality system)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality worth)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(sector, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(insurance, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(operating expense, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(insurance, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(sector, has quality news) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(insurance, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(health, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(health, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(banking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(online banking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(banking, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality better)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
Remarkable(online banking, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality better)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality system)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(banking, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(banking, has quality worth)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality worth)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(health, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(health, has quality system)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(health, quality of life) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(health, quality of life)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(health, be related quality of life important) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(health, be related quality of life important)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(insurance, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(insurance, has quality good)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(insurance, has quality good)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(insurance, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(insurance, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(operating expense, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(sector, has quality good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(sector, has quality news)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(banking, has quality system)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(banking, has quality worth)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(health, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(health, has quality system)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(banking, has quality better)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(banking, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(health, quality of life)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(online banking, has quality better)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(online banking, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(health, be related quality of life important)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(operating expense, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(sector, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(sector, has quality news)