integration: has quality bad

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
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality question 0.76
be in bad weather 0.76
has quality questions 0.75
is good thing 0.75
has quality definition 0.75

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: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(integration, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(service, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(service, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(separation, has quality good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(separation, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(security system, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(migration, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(operating system, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(security system, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(operating system, has quality questions)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(migration, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(operating system, has quality question)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(migration, is good thing)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(integration, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
Remarkable(separation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(separation, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(migration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(migration, has quality bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(migration, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(migration, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(security system, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(security system, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(operating system, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(operating system, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(separation, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(separation, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
Remarkable(security system, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(security system, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(migration, is good thing) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(migration, is good thing)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(operating system, has quality question) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(operating system, has quality question)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(operating system, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(operating system, has quality questions)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(integration, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Typical(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(integration, has quality good)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(integration, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.67
Typical(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(integration, is good thing)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.58
Salient(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(integration, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(integration, is good thing)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.58
Salient(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(integration, is good thing)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(integration, is good thing)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Salient(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(integration, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(separation, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(separation, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(migration, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(security system, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(operating system, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(migration, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(security system, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(migration, is good thing)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(operating system, has quality question)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(operating system, has quality questions)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Typical(integration, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)