method: was different from people

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
was different from people 1.00
was different from other people 0.98
be different from logorithm 0.89
were helpful to early people 0.81
were helpful to people 0.81
be bad after all 0.79
vary between different businesses 0.77
were important to hunters-gatherers 0.76
be good way separate 0.76
be in sc2 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

0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(tool, were helpful to early people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(tool, were important to hunters-gatherers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(tool, were helpful to people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(standard, vary between different businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(option, be in sc2) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(standard, be bad after all) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(standard, be bad after all)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(option, be in sc2)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(tool, were helpful to people)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(standard, vary between different businesses)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(tool, were helpful to early people)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(tool, were important to hunters-gatherers)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(standard, be bad after all)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(option, be in sc2)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(tool, were helpful to early people)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(tool, were important to hunters-gatherers)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(tool, were helpful to people)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(standard, vary between different businesses)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(extraction, be good way separate)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(algorithm, be different from logorithm)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(tool, were helpful to early people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(method, was different from people)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(tool, were helpful to people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(method, was different from people)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(tool, were important to hunters-gatherers) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(method, was different from people)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(standard, vary between different businesses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(method, was different from people)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(standard, be bad after all) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(method, was different from people)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(option, be in sc2) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(method, was different from people)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(algorithm, be different from logorithm) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(algorithm, be different from logorithm)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(extraction, be good way separate) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(extraction, be good way separate)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(method, was different from people)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from other people)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(method, was different from other people)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(method, was different from other people)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.98
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(method, was different from other people)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(method, was different from people)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(standard, be bad after all)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(standard, vary between different businesses)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(tool, were helpful to people)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(option, be in sc2)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(tool, were helpful to early people)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.15
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(tool, were important to hunters-gatherers)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(algorithm, be different from logorithm)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(extraction, be good way separate)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(standard, be bad after all)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(standard, vary between different businesses)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(tool, were helpful to people)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(option, be in sc2)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(tool, were helpful to early people)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(method, was different from people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(tool, were important to hunters-gatherers)