macro: be important for weight loss

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents topic
Weight: 0.57
, action
Weight: 0.54
, command
Weight: 0.53
, method
Weight: 0.52
Siblings commodity
Weight: 0.31
, economy
Weight: 0.31
, trigonometric function
Weight: 0.31
, recursion
Weight: 0.31
, fundamental
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be important for weight loss 1.00
have impact on individuals with loss 0.82
have positive impact on individuals with loss 0.80
have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss 0.77
have impact on individuals with sensory loss 0.77

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

0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(method, have positive impact on individuals with loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(macro, be important for weight loss)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(method, have impact on individuals with loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(macro, be important for weight loss)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(method, have impact on individuals with sensory loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(macro, be important for weight loss)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(method, have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(macro, be important for weight loss)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(method, have impact on individuals with loss)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(method, have positive impact on individuals with loss)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(method, have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(method, have impact on individuals with sensory loss)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(method, have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(method, have positive impact on individuals with loss)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(method, have impact on individuals with sensory loss)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(method, have impact on individuals with loss)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.73
Plausible(method, have impact on individuals with loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(method, have positive impact on individuals with loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(method, have impact on individuals with sensory loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(method, have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(macro, be important for weight loss)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(macro, be important for weight loss)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, have impact on individuals with loss)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(method, have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(method, have impact on individuals with sensory loss)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(method, have positive impact on individuals with loss)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, have impact on individuals with loss)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(method, have positive impact on individuals with loss)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(method, have positive impact on individuals with sensory loss)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
Typical(macro, be important for weight loss) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(method, have impact on individuals with sensory loss)