intersection: have cameras

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents location
Weight: 0.66
, area
Weight: 0.63
, junction
Weight: 0.62
, pedestrian
Weight: 0.60
Siblings traffic light
Weight: 0.70
, stoplight
Weight: 0.38
, driveway
Weight: 0.34
, sidewalk
Weight: 0.34
, plaza
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
have cameras 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

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(traffic light, have cameras)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.60
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(traffic light, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(traffic light, have cameras)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Salient(intersection, have cameras)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Salient(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(intersection, have cameras)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(intersection, have cameras)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(intersection, have cameras) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Typical(traffic light, have cameras)