new orleans: was vulnerable to 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
was vulnerable to flooding 1.00
be vulnerable to flooding 0.99
be at risk of flooding 0.91
be prone to floods 0.88
be susceptible to hurricanes 0.78
be prone to hurricanes 0.75
was affected badly by hurricane katrina 0.75

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: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Salient(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be at risk of flooding)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, was affected badly by hurricane katrina)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(new orleans, was affected badly by hurricane katrina)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(new orleans, was affected badly by hurricane katrina)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be susceptible to hurricanes)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Salient(new orleans, be susceptible to hurricanes)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be prone to hurricanes)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(new orleans, be susceptible to hurricanes)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(new orleans, was affected badly by hurricane katrina)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be susceptible to hurricanes)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Salient(new orleans, be vulnerable to flooding)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Salient(new orleans, be prone to hurricanes)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, be prone to floods)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(new orleans, be prone to floods)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be prone to hurricanes)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(new orleans, be prone to hurricanes)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(new orleans, be prone to floods)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(new orleans, be prone to floods)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Salient(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(new orleans, was vulnerable to flooding)