lag: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.56
, problem
Weight: 0.53
, issue
Weight: 0.52
, factor
Weight: 0.52
, concern
Weight: 0.47
Siblings hiccup
Weight: 0.31
, decline
Weight: 0.31
, friction
Weight: 0.31
, weakness
Weight: 0.31
, volatility
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
is bad now 0.84
be bad today 0.82

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

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(decline, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hiccup, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(friction, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(volatility, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(weakness, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(weakness, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(weakness, has quality bad)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(volatility, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(volatility, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(friction, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(friction, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hiccup, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(hiccup, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(decline, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(decline, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(lag, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(lag, be bad today)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Salient(lag, be bad today)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.25
Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(lag, be bad today)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(lag, be bad today)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(lag, is bad now)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(lag, is bad now)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(lag, is bad now)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.25
Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(lag, is bad now)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(lag, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(weakness, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(volatility, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(friction, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(hiccup, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(lag, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(decline, has quality bad)