lack: be in area

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents factor
Weight: 0.64
, reason
Weight: 0.61
, ability
Weight: 0.61
, symptom
Weight: 0.61
Siblings absence
Weight: 0.64
, poor people
Weight: 0.60
, apathy
Weight: 0.34
, laziness
Weight: 0.34
, characteristic
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in area 1.00
be related to area 0.91
be in west 0.77
live in city 0.76

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

0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(factor, be related to area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(lack, be in area)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(factor, be related to area)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(factor, be related to area)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(poor people, be in west)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(factor, be related to area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(lack, be in area)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
Remarkable(poor people, be in west) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(poor people, be in west)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Salient(lack, be in area)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.34
Salient(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(lack, be in area)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(lack, be in area)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(factor, be related to area)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(poor people, be in west)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.46
Typical(lack, be in area) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(factor, be related to area)