national parks: were important to scientists

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

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
were important to scientists 1.00
be important to humans 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.63
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(park, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(national parks, were important to scientists)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(wilderness, be important to humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(national parks, were important to scientists)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(park, were important to scientists)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(wilderness, be important to humans)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(park, were important to scientists)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(wilderness, be important to humans)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(park, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(national parks, were important to scientists)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(wilderness, be important to humans) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(national parks, were important to scientists)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(national parks, were important to scientists)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.99
Salient(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists)

Typical implies Plausible

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(national parks, were important to scientists)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(park, were important to scientists)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(wilderness, be important to humans)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(park, were important to scientists)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(national parks, were important to scientists) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(wilderness, be important to humans)