integration: be in nearly course

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents feature
Weight: 0.63
, service
Weight: 0.63
, operation
Weight: 0.62
, function
Weight: 0.60
, problem
Weight: 0.60
Siblings internet service provider
Weight: 0.33
, security system
Weight: 0.33
, operating system
Weight: 0.33
, migration
Weight: 0.33
, separation
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in nearly course 1.00
be in course 0.91
be with three 0.76
then in past 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

0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(problem, then in past) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(integration, be in nearly course)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(problem, then in past)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.12
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(problem, then in past)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(problem, then in past) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
Remarkable(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(integration, be in nearly course)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(integration, be in nearly course)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.98
Remarkable(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(integration, be in course)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.01
Typical(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(integration, be in course)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.49
Salient(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(integration, be in course)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(integration, be in course)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
Salient(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(integration, be in nearly course)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(integration, be in nearly course)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(problem, then in past)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.23
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.01
Typical(integration, be in nearly course) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(problem, then in past)