liquid crystal: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents electronic device
Weight: 0.68
, liquid
Weight: 0.68
, substrate
Weight: 0.68
, material
Weight: 0.65
Siblings liquid water
Weight: 0.40
, liquid nitrogen
Weight: 0.38
, titanium dioxide
Weight: 0.35
, water vapor
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality definition 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

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(titanium dioxide, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(liquid nitrogen, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(liquid nitrogen, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(liquid nitrogen, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
Remarkable(titanium dioxide, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(titanium dioxide, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(liquid crystal, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(liquid crystal, has quality definition)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(liquid crystal, has quality definition)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality definition)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(liquid crystal, has quality definition)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(liquid crystal, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(titanium dioxide, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(liquid crystal, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(liquid nitrogen, has quality bad)