nanotechnology: is beneficial

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents technology
Weight: 0.66
, sector
Weight: 0.65
, field
Weight: 0.63
, topic
Weight: 0.62
, issue
Weight: 0.59
Siblings computer science
Weight: 0.36
, fiber optics
Weight: 0.35
, optics
Weight: 0.34
, semiconductor
Weight: 0.34
, automobile industry
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
is beneficial 1.00
is useful 0.81

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

0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(semiconductor, is useful)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(optics, is useful)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(optics, is useful)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(optics, is useful)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(semiconductor, is useful)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(semiconductor, is useful)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(nanotechnology, is beneficial)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.34
Typical(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(nanotechnology, is useful)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(nanotechnology, is useful)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(nanotechnology, is useful)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(nanotechnology, is useful)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Typical(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(nanotechnology, is beneficial)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Typical(nanotechnology, is beneficial)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(optics, is useful)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(nanotechnology, is beneficial)
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(semiconductor, is useful)