negotiable instrument: has quality questions

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents instrument
Weight: 0.83
, document
Weight: 0.66
, topic
Weight: 0.61
, form
Weight: 0.59
Siblings note
Weight: 0.63
, bearer
Weight: 0.55
, cheque
Weight: 0.49
, debt instrument
Weight: 0.40
, musical instrument
Weight: 0.39

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality questions 1.00
has quality good 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

0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(instrument, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(instrument, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(musical instrument, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(debt instrument, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(debt instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(debt instrument, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(musical instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(musical instrument, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
Salient(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(negotiable instrument, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.40
Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Salient(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality questions)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(instrument, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(debt instrument, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(musical instrument, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.40
Typical(negotiable instrument, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(instrument, has quality good)