lawyer: lie foundation of argument

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents activist
Weight: 0.71
, expert
Weight: 0.69
, specialist
Weight: 0.66
, defendant
Weight: 0.66
Siblings investigator
Weight: 0.65
, solicitor
Weight: 0.58
, arbitrator
Weight: 0.54
, fisher
Weight: 0.54
, judge
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
lie foundation of argument 1.00
consider argument 0.83
hear argument 0.81
settle argument 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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(judge, hear argument)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(judge, settle argument)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(judge, consider argument)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(arbitrator, settle argument)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(arbitrator, settle argument)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(arbitrator, settle argument)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(judge, settle argument)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(judge, settle argument)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(judge, consider argument)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(judge, consider argument)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(judge, hear argument)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(judge, hear argument)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Salient(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)

Typical implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(judge, consider argument)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(arbitrator, settle argument)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(judge, hear argument)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, lie foundation of argument)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(judge, settle argument)