napalm: was affective

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents chemical weapon
Weight: 0.68
, weapon
Weight: 0.64
, thing
Weight: 0.50
, chemical
Weight: 0.49
, fire
Weight: 0.48
Siblings mustard gas
Weight: 0.35
, sarin
Weight: 0.35
, biological weapon
Weight: 0.34
, nuclear weapon
Weight: 0.34
, pepper spray
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
was affective 1.00
was affective in vietnam 0.89
is effective 0.78

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

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(nuclear weapon, is effective)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(pepper spray, is effective)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(pepper spray, is effective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(pepper spray, is effective)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(nuclear weapon, is effective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(nuclear weapon, is effective)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(napalm, was affective)

Similarity expansion

0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(napalm, was affective in vietnam)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(napalm, was affective in vietnam)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(napalm, was affective in vietnam)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(napalm, is effective)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(napalm, is effective)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(napalm, was affective)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(napalm, was affective)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(pepper spray, is effective)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(napalm, was affective) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(nuclear weapon, is effective)