inventory: has quality evil

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents document
Weight: 0.61
, function
Weight: 0.60
, detail
Weight: 0.60
, operation
Weight: 0.59
, line item
Weight: 0.58
Siblings business activity
Weight: 0.32
, documentation
Weight: 0.32
, distribution
Weight: 0.32
, supply
Weight: 0.32
, operating system
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality evil 1.00
is necessary evil 0.90
has quality bad 0.80
has quality good 0.78

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

0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(line item, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(inventory, has quality evil)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(line item, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(line item, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(operating system, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(line item, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(inventory, has quality evil)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(business activity, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(operating system, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(operating system, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(inventory, has quality evil)

Similarity expansion

0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(inventory, is necessary evil)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(inventory, is necessary evil)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(inventory, is necessary evil)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(inventory, has quality bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(inventory, has quality bad)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(inventory, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(inventory, is necessary evil)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(inventory, has quality evil)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(line item, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(operating system, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(business activity, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(inventory, has quality evil) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(line item, has quality good)