nuclear weapon: be underground in 2009

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents chemical weapon
Weight: 0.80
, nuclear power plant
Weight: 0.75
, weapon
Weight: 0.73
, missile
Weight: 0.73
, ballistic missile
Weight: 0.67
Siblings atomic bomb
Weight: 0.79
, neutron bomb
Weight: 0.72
, hydrogen bomb
Weight: 0.72
, cruise missile
Weight: 0.71
, trident
Weight: 0.59

Related properties

Property Similarity
be underground in 2009 1.00
be tested underground 0.88

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

0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(weapon, be tested underground)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(weapon, be tested underground)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(weapon, be tested underground)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(weapon, be tested underground)
Evidence: 0.22
Remarkable(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Salient(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)

Similarity expansion

0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(nuclear weapon, be tested underground)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.26
Salient(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(nuclear weapon, be tested underground)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.22
Remarkable(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(nuclear weapon, be tested underground)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Typical(nuclear weapon, be tested underground)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.26
Salient(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(weapon, be tested underground)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.60
Typical(nuclear weapon, be underground in 2009)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(weapon, be tested underground)