intel: has quality service

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents microprocessor
Weight: 0.64
, competitor
Weight: 0.60
, customer
Weight: 0.60
, player
Weight: 0.58
, business
Weight: 0.58
Siblings dvd player
Weight: 0.32
, samsung
Weight: 0.32
, motorola
Weight: 0.31
, john deere
Weight: 0.31
, thomas
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality service 1.00
has quality good 0.81
has quality better 0.80
has quality bad 0.79
has quality worth 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: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(customer, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(intel, has quality service)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(microprocessor, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(intel, has quality service)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(customer, has quality service)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(microprocessor, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(customer, has quality service)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(microprocessor, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(samsung, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(samsung, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(customer, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(intel, has quality service)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(microprocessor, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(intel, has quality service)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(samsung, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(samsung, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(samsung, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(samsung, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(intel, has quality service)

Similarity expansion

0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality better)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(intel, has quality worth)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(intel, has quality better)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(intel, has quality worth)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(intel, has quality worth)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(intel, has quality better)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(intel, has quality better)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality worth)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(intel, has quality service)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(customer, has quality service)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(microprocessor, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(samsung, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(samsung, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(customer, has quality service)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(intel, has quality service) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(microprocessor, has quality good)