metal: be better conductor than plastic

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents commodity
Weight: 0.66
, conductor
Weight: 0.63
, raw material
Weight: 0.63
, hard rock
Weight: 0.62
, material
Weight: 0.61
Siblings beryllium
Weight: 0.72
, tantalum
Weight: 0.71
, aluminum foil
Weight: 0.69
, heavy metal
Weight: 0.68
, cobalt
Weight: 0.68

Related properties

Property Similarity
be better conductor than plastic 1.00
be worse conductor than metal 0.92
be better conductor than wood 0.91
be better electric conductor than metal 0.90
be better electric conductor than hot metal 0.88
be better conductors than glass 0.88
is good conductor 0.87
be better conductors than non-metals 0.87
be much better thermal conductor than other materials 0.86
is conductor 0.86

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: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(aluminum foil, is good conductor)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(aluminum foil, is conductor)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(aluminum foil, is good conductor)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(aluminum foil, is good conductor)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(aluminum foil, is conductor)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(aluminum foil, is conductor)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(metal, be better conductor than plastic)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than wood)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Salient(metal, be better conductor than wood)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(metal, be better conductor than wood)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(metal, be better conductor than wood)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductors than glass)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Salient(metal, be better conductors than glass)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.66
Typical(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(metal, be better conductors than glass)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(metal, be better conductors than glass)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)

Typical implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.35
Plausible(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(metal, be better conductor than plastic)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(aluminum foil, is conductor)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(metal, be better conductor than plastic)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(aluminum foil, is good conductor)