node: is poorly explained everywhere

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents lymph node
Weight: 0.71
, network device
Weight: 0.65
, network
Weight: 0.62
, point
Weight: 0.59
Siblings base station
Weight: 0.64
, root
Weight: 0.60
, terminal
Weight: 0.57
, router
Weight: 0.36
, computer network
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
is poorly explained everywhere 1.00
is poorly explained literally everywhere 0.97
is poorly explained 0.94
is explained everywhere 0.90
is explained literally everywhere 0.88
is explained 0.79

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: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(node, is explained everywhere)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(node, is poorly explained literally everywhere)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(node, is poorly explained literally everywhere)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(node, is poorly explained literally everywhere)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(node, is poorly explained)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(node, is poorly explained literally everywhere)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(node, is explained literally everywhere)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(node, is explained everywhere)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Salient(node, is poorly explained)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(node, is poorly explained)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.57
Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(node, is explained)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(node, is explained literally everywhere)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(node, is explained)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(node, is explained everywhere)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(node, is explained literally everywhere)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(node, is poorly explained)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Salient(node, is explained)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(node, is explained literally everywhere)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(node, is explained everywhere)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(node, is explained)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Salient(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(node, is poorly explained everywhere)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(node, is poorly explained everywhere)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(node, is poorly explained everywhere)