lens: has quality better

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents optics
Weight: 0.60
, piece
Weight: 0.60
, feature
Weight: 0.59
, polymer
Weight: 0.59
Siblings contact lens
Weight: 0.84
, camera lens
Weight: 0.70
, mirror
Weight: 0.65
, human eye
Weight: 0.62
, prism
Weight: 0.58

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality better 1.00
has quality good 0.94
has quality bad 0.90
is quality 0.89
make better sharper pictures 0.78
improve in future 0.76
has consistency density 0.76
be better than naruto 0.76
improve night vision 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

0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(optics, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(lens, has quality better)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(piece, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(lens, has quality better)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(piece, be better than naruto)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(lens, has quality better)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(optics, improve in future)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(lens, has quality better)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(piece, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(optics, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(optics, improve in future)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(piece, be better than naruto)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(optics, improve in future)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(optics, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(piece, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(piece, be better than naruto)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(prism, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(prism, has quality better)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(optics, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(lens, has quality better)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(piece, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(lens, has quality better)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(piece, be better than naruto)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(lens, has quality better)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(optics, improve in future)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(lens, has quality better)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(prism, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(prism, has quality better)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(prism, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(prism, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(lens, has quality better)

Similarity expansion

0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(lens, has quality good)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(lens, has quality good)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(lens, has quality good)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(lens, improve night vision)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(lens, improve night vision)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(lens, improve night vision)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(lens, improve night vision)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Salient(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(lens, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(piece, be better than naruto)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(piece, has quality good)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(optics, improve in future)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(optics, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(prism, has quality better)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(prism, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(piece, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(optics, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(piece, be better than naruto)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(lens, has quality better)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(optics, improve in future)