nike: be bad running

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents brand
Weight: 0.62
, shoe
Weight: 0.62
, product
Weight: 0.61
, client
Weight: 0.55
, name
Weight: 0.54
Siblings chanel
Weight: 0.34
, pepsi
Weight: 0.34
, hermes
Weight: 0.34
, oxford
Weight: 0.34
, burberry
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be bad running 1.00
run 0.77
has quality bad 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(client, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(nike, be bad running)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.19
Plausible(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(client, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(client, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(client, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
Remarkable(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Plausible(nike, be bad running)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.19
Plausible(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Salient(nike, be bad running)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(nike, run)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.19
Plausible(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(nike, run)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.17
Salient(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(nike, run)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(nike, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.15
Remarkable(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(nike, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.19
Plausible(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(nike, has quality bad)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.15
Remarkable(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(nike, run)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.17
Salient(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(nike, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.17
Salient(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(nike, be bad running)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.19
Plausible(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(nike, be bad running)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(client, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.23
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(nike, be bad running) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(client, has quality bad)