judge: rule in favor of defendant

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents activist
Weight: 0.65
, officer
Weight: 0.63
, justice
Weight: 0.61
, trial
Weight: 0.57
Siblings supreme court
Weight: 0.74
, defense attorney
Weight: 0.64
, mayor
Weight: 0.58
, contestant
Weight: 0.53
, lawyer
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
rule in favor of defendant 1.00
rule in your favor 0.90
judge defendant to be guilty 0.84
object to judge rule 0.84
rule over case 0.83
be rule in court today 0.83
clear defendant of all charge 0.82
fine defendant 0.81
rule their courtroom 0.80
rule that something be inadmissable 0.79

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

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(defense attorney, object to judge rule)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(defense attorney, object to judge rule) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Plausible(defense attorney, object to judge rule)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(judge, rule in favor of defendant)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(judge, rule in your favor)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(judge, fine defendant)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Salient(judge, rule in your favor)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(judge, judge defendant to be guilty)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(judge, rule that something be inadmissable)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(judge, rule in favor of defendant)

Typical implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(judge, rule in favor of defendant)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(judge, rule in favor of defendant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(defense attorney, object to judge rule)