landfill: be better than incinerators

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents project
Weight: 0.63
, facility
Weight: 0.58
, source
Weight: 0.55
, issue
Weight: 0.54
Siblings recycling
Weight: 0.35
, chemical plant
Weight: 0.34
, water plant
Weight: 0.34
, construction site
Weight: 0.33
, nuclear power plant
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be better than incinerators 1.00
be than landfill 0.80
reduce need for landfill 0.78
decrease amount in landfills 0.76
be worse than coal power plants 0.76
produce less waste 0.75

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: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(recycling, decrease amount in landfills)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(recycling, produce less waste)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(recycling, reduce need for landfill)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(recycling, be than landfill)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(nuclear power plant, be worse than coal power plants)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(recycling, be than landfill) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(recycling, be than landfill)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(nuclear power plant, be worse than coal power plants) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(nuclear power plant, be worse than coal power plants)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(recycling, decrease amount in landfills) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(recycling, decrease amount in landfills)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(recycling, reduce need for landfill) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(recycling, reduce need for landfill)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(recycling, produce less waste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(recycling, produce less waste)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(landfill, be better than incinerators)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.81
Salient(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(landfill, be better than incinerators)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Typical(recycling, be than landfill)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(recycling, reduce need for landfill)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(recycling, decrease amount in landfills)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(recycling, produce less waste)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(landfill, be better than incinerators) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(nuclear power plant, be worse than coal power plants)