national park: have potential for earthquakes

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents national forest
Weight: 0.77
, area
Weight: 0.70
, land
Weight: 0.69
, park
Weight: 0.69
Siblings grand canyon
Weight: 0.74
, death valley
Weight: 0.69
, beach
Weight: 0.63
, joshua tree
Weight: 0.63

Related properties

Property Similarity
have potential for earthquakes 1.00
have great potential for earthquakes 0.97
have potential 0.78
have great potential 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

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(national park, have potential for earthquakes)

Similarity expansion

0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(national park, have great potential for earthquakes)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(national park, have great potential for earthquakes)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(national park, have great potential for earthquakes)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Typical(national park, have potential)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(national park, have great potential)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(national park, have potential)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(national park, have great potential for earthquakes)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(national park, have potential)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(national park, have great potential)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(national park, have great potential)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(national park, have great potential)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(national park, have potential)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Salient(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(national park, have potential for earthquakes)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(national park, have potential for earthquakes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(national park, have potential for earthquakes)