method: act dangerous

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents approach
Weight: 0.72
, standard
Weight: 0.66
, option
Weight: 0.65
, tool
Weight: 0.61
Siblings algorithm
Weight: 0.69
, extraction
Weight: 0.67
, strategy
Weight: 0.67
, adhesive tape
Weight: 0.66
, spray
Weight: 0.65

Related properties

Property Similarity
act dangerous 1.00
is dangerous 0.88
act bad 0.87

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

0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(option, is dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(method, act dangerous)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(option, is dangerous)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(option, is dangerous)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(option, is dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(method, act dangerous)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Salient(method, act dangerous)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Salient(method, act bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(method, act bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(method, act bad)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(method, act bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(method, act dangerous)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(method, act dangerous)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(option, is dangerous)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(method, act dangerous) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(option, is dangerous)