monogamy: has quality better

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.60
, issue
Weight: 0.54
, factor
Weight: 0.52
, principle
Weight: 0.51
, topic
Weight: 0.50
Siblings homosexual
Weight: 0.33
, female circumcision
Weight: 0.33
, infidelity
Weight: 0.33
, lust
Weight: 0.33
, kissing
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality better 1.00
has quality good 0.94
has quality bad 0.90
is best 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(lust, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(infidelity, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(kissing, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(lust, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(kissing, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(female circumcision, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(female circumcision, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
Remarkable(lust, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(lust, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(female circumcision, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(female circumcision, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(infidelity, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(infidelity, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(kissing, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(kissing, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(lust, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(lust, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(female circumcision, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(female circumcision, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
Remarkable(kissing, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(kissing, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(monogamy, has quality better)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Salient(monogamy, has quality bad)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality bad)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(monogamy, has quality bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(monogamy, has quality bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality good)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(monogamy, has quality good)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(monogamy, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(monogamy, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, is best)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(monogamy, is best)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(monogamy, is best)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(monogamy, is best)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(monogamy, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(lust, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(lust, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(infidelity, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(kissing, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(female circumcision, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(female circumcision, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(monogamy, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(kissing, has quality good)