new orleans: be at risk of flooding

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents new england
Weight: 0.68
, hurricane
Weight: 0.68
, texas
Weight: 0.67
, memphis
Weight: 0.67
Siblings mardi gras
Weight: 0.66
, washington
Weight: 0.62
, minnesota
Weight: 0.57
, gumbo
Weight: 0.56

Related properties

Property Similarity
be at risk of flooding 1.00
be vulnerable to flooding 0.91
was vulnerable to flooding 0.91
be prone to floods 0.83

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

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Salient(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.43
Salient(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(new orleans, be prone to floods)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.43
Salient(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Salient(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be prone to floods)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be prone to floods)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.43
Salient(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(new orleans, be prone to floods)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Salient(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(new orleans, be at risk of flooding) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)