marketing: be in business

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents strategy
Weight: 0.65
, department
Weight: 0.63
, aspect
Weight: 0.61
, partner
Weight: 0.61
, business
Weight: 0.60
Siblings advertising agency
Weight: 0.66
, planning
Weight: 0.34
, manager
Weight: 0.33
, accounting firm
Weight: 0.33
, engineering
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in business 1.00
be to business 0.99
be for business 0.98
help business 0.91
really is important to business 0.85
be important to success of business 0.83
be important to businesses 0.83
be important to small businesses 0.82
help small-scale businesses 0.81
help businesses 0.81

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

0.65
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(partner, be to business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(marketing, be in business)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.27
Plausible(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(partner, be to business)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.19
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(partner, be to business)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(partner, be to business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(marketing, be in business)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.27
Plausible(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(marketing, be in business)

Similarity expansion

0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(marketing, be to business)
0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(marketing, be for business)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.07
Typical(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(marketing, be to business)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.07
Typical(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(marketing, be for business)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(marketing, help business)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Salient(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(marketing, be in business)

Typical implies Plausible

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.27
Plausible(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(marketing, be in business)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(partner, be to business)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.07
Typical(marketing, be in business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(partner, be to business)