obligation: be in contracts

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents provision
Weight: 0.62
, act
Weight: 0.60
, principle
Weight: 0.60
, rule
Weight: 0.59
Siblings operating expense
Weight: 0.64
, condition
Weight: 0.62
, authority
Weight: 0.61
, debt instrument
Weight: 0.60
, burden
Weight: 0.59

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in contracts 1.00
be important in contract 0.88
be in contract law 0.85

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

0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.25
Plausible(rule, be in contract law) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(obligation, be in contracts)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(rule, be in contract law)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(rule, be in contract law)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(condition, be important in contract)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.25
Plausible(rule, be in contract law) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
Remarkable(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(obligation, be in contracts)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(condition, be important in contract) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(condition, be important in contract)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Salient(obligation, be in contracts)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.00
Salient(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(obligation, be in contracts)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(obligation, be in contracts)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Typical(rule, be in contract law)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.00
¬ Remarkable(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(condition, be important in contract)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.10
Typical(obligation, be in contracts) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Typical(rule, be in contract law)