network: were created

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents network device
Weight: 0.66
, security system
Weight: 0.63
, country
Weight: 0.62
, web site
Weight: 0.62
Siblings computer network
Weight: 0.83
, cartoon network
Weight: 0.83
, internet service provider
Weight: 0.72
, neural network
Weight: 0.67
, backbone
Weight: 0.65

Related properties

Property Similarity
were created 1.00
were developed 0.84
be formed 0.77

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

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(neural network, be formed)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(neural network, be formed) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Plausible(neural network, be formed)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(network, were created)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(network, be formed)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(network, were developed)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(network, be formed)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(network, were developed)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Salient(network, be formed)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(network, were developed)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(network, were developed)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(network, be formed)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
Salient(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(network, were created)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(network, were created)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(network, were created) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(neural network, be formed)