maryland: was in year 1632

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents new york
Weight: 0.65
, baltimore
Weight: 0.62
, school
Weight: 0.61
, washington
Weight: 0.58
Siblings delaware
Weight: 0.58
, philadelphia
Weight: 0.36
, connecticut
Weight: 0.36
, massachusetts
Weight: 0.36
, new york city
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
was in year 1632 1.00
was setteled 0.84
was started 0.76

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

0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(new york, was started) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(maryland, was in year 1632)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(new york, was started)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(new york, was started)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(connecticut, was started)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(new york city, was started)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(massachusetts, was started)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(new york, was started) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(massachusetts, was started) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(massachusetts, was started)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(new york city, was started) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(new york city, was started)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
Remarkable(connecticut, was started) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(connecticut, was started)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(maryland, was in year 1632)

Similarity expansion

0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(maryland, was setteled)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(maryland, was setteled)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(maryland, was setteled)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(maryland, was started)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(maryland, was started)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(maryland, was started)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was setteled)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was started)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(maryland, was in year 1632)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(new york, was started)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(new york city, was started)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Typical(massachusetts, was started)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(connecticut, was started)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(maryland, was in year 1632) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(new york, was started)