latin: was important in ages

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents language
Weight: 0.59
, subject
Weight: 0.58
, term
Weight: 0.57
, word
Weight: 0.56
, discipline
Weight: 0.55
Siblings creole
Weight: 0.45
, italian language
Weight: 0.35
, chinese language
Weight: 0.35
, english language
Weight: 0.35
, haitian creole
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
was important in ages 1.00
was important in middle ages 0.95
was kept in ages 0.90
was kept in middle ages 0.88

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(latin, was important in ages)

Similarity expansion

0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(latin, was important in middle ages)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(latin, was kept in ages)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Salient(latin, was kept in middle ages)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(latin, was kept in ages)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(latin, was important in middle ages)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(latin, was important in middle ages)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(latin, was kept in ages)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(latin, was kept in middle ages)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(latin, was kept in middle ages)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(latin, was important in middle ages)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(latin, was kept in middle ages)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(latin, was kept in ages)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(latin, was important in ages)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(latin, was important in ages)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(latin, was important in ages)