intel: is successful

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
is successful 1.00

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(motorola, is successful)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(john deere, is successful)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(samsung, is successful)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(samsung, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(samsung, is successful)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(john deere, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(john deere, is successful)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(motorola, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(motorola, is successful)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(intel, is successful)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(intel, is successful)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(motorola, is successful)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(john deere, is successful)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(intel, is successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(samsung, is successful)