mandate: is difficult

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents rule
Weight: 0.68
, regulation
Weight: 0.65
, policy
Weight: 0.58
, authority
Weight: 0.58
Siblings law
Weight: 0.68
, legislation
Weight: 0.34
, prohibition
Weight: 0.34
, recommendation
Weight: 0.33
, amendment
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
is difficult 1.00
is problematic 0.82
be difficult objective achieve 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: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(amendment, is difficult)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(amendment, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(amendment, is difficult)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(mandate, is difficult)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(mandate, is problematic)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(mandate, is problematic)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(mandate, be difficult objective achieve)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(mandate, is problematic)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(mandate, be difficult objective achieve)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(mandate, be difficult objective achieve)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(mandate, be difficult objective achieve)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(mandate, is problematic)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(mandate, is difficult)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(mandate, is difficult)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(mandate, is difficult) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(amendment, is difficult)