modeling: be in science

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents tool
Weight: 0.65
, activity
Weight: 0.59
, part
Weight: 0.57
, discipline
Weight: 0.57
, strategy
Weight: 0.56
Siblings mapping
Weight: 0.34
, free software
Weight: 0.32
, calculator
Weight: 0.32
, business activity
Weight: 0.32
, spreadsheet
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in science 1.00
be important in field of computer science 0.88
do math 0.75
be to scientists 0.75

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

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(calculator, do math)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(calculator, do math) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(calculator, do math)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(modeling, be in science)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(modeling, be important in field of computer science)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(modeling, be important in field of computer science)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(modeling, be to scientists)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(modeling, be important in field of computer science)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.08
Typical(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(modeling, be to scientists)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Salient(modeling, be to scientists)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(modeling, be to scientists)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.08
Typical(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(modeling, be important in field of computer science)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(modeling, be in science)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Plausible(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(modeling, be in science)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(modeling, be in science) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(calculator, do math)