nike: be out of business

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 out of business 1.00
go out of business 0.95
be good company work for 0.78

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

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(pepsi, be good company work for)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(pepsi, be good company work for) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(pepsi, be good company work for)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(nike, be out of business)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(nike, go out of business)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(nike, go out of business)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.81
Typical(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(nike, go out of business)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Remarkable(nike, go out of business)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.81
Typical(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(nike, be good company work for)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(nike, be good company work for)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(nike, be good company work for)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(nike, be good company work for)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(nike, be out of business)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(nike, be out of business)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(nike, be out of business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(pepsi, be good company work for)