mandala: has quality effect

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents graphic
Weight: 0.39
, form
Weight: 0.37
, artwork
Weight: 0.37
, place
Weight: 0.24
Siblings sculpture
Weight: 0.29
, collage
Weight: 0.28
, tapestry
Weight: 0.28
, mosaic
Weight: 0.28
, calligraphy
Weight: 0.27

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality effect 1.00
is quality 0.79
has quality good 0.78
has quality bad 0.78

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

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(sculpture, is quality)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(collage, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(mosaic, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(mosaic, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(mosaic, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(collage, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(collage, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(sculpture, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(sculpture, is quality)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(mandala, has quality effect)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality bad)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(mandala, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(mandala, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(mandala, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(mandala, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(mandala, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mandala, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.60
Plausible(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(mandala, has quality effect)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(mosaic, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(collage, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(mandala, has quality effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(sculpture, is quality)