national parks: has quality worth

Related concepts

Parents	park Weight: 0.70 , campground Weight: 0.64 , wilderness Weight: 0.64 , united states Weight: 0.63
Siblings	yellowstone national park Weight: 0.83 , lake powell Weight: 0.70 , yellowstone Weight: 0.57 , national park Weight: 0.40 , central park Weight: 0.39

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality worth	1.00
has quality good	0.85
has quality bad	0.82

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.52

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.81

Plausible(wilderness, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Typical(national parks, has quality worth)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(park, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Typical(national parks, has quality worth)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Plausible(park, has quality bad)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Plausible(wilderness, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.35

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(park, has quality bad)

0.26

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Remarkable(wilderness, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.12

¬ Remarkable(yellowstone, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.81

Plausible(wilderness, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Plausible(national parks, has quality worth)

0.33

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.57

Plausible(park, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Plausible(national parks, has quality worth)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.12

Remarkable(yellowstone, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.12

¬ Plausible(yellowstone, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Salient(national parks, has quality worth)

Similarity expansion

0.68

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.90

Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.16

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality bad)

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.79

Salient(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.19

¬ Salient(national parks, has quality bad)

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.90

Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality good)

0.62

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.25

¬ Plausible(national parks, has quality bad)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.79

Salient(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.96

¬ Salient(national parks, has quality good)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.41

Typical(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Typical(national parks, has quality bad)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Plausible(national parks, has quality good)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.41

Typical(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(national parks, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.79

Salient(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Typical(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.55

Plausible(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Typical(national parks, has quality worth)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.12

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Typical(park, has quality bad)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.20
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(wilderness, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Typical(yellowstone, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.21

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.41

Typical(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Typical(park, has quality bad)

0.19

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.41

Typical(national parks, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(wilderness, has quality good)