observation: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents activity
Weight: 0.65
, instrument
Weight: 0.61
, tool
Weight: 0.61
, practice
Weight: 0.61
Siblings experiment
Weight: 0.65
, outlier
Weight: 0.53
, hipparchus
Weight: 0.33
, evaluation
Weight: 0.33
, telescope
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
be good for business 0.80
affect water quality 0.79
has quality question 0.77
has quality questions 0.76
is best 0.76
actually get better 0.75
improve performance 0.75
make perfect 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

0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(practice, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(tool, is best) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(practice, make perfect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(practice, be good for business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(practice, improve performance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(practice, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(instrument, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(tool, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(practice, be good for business)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(practice, improve performance)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(practice, make perfect)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(tool, is best)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(tool, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(instrument, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(tool, is best)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(practice, has quality good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(practice, make perfect)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(practice, be good for business)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(practice, improve performance)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(outlier, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(experiment, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(evaluation, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(evaluation, has quality question)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(evaluation, has quality questions)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(instrument, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(practice, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(tool, is best) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(practice, be good for business) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(practice, make perfect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(practice, improve performance) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(observation, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(evaluation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(evaluation, has quality good)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(experiment, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(experiment, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(outlier, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Plausible(outlier, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(evaluation, has quality question) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(evaluation, has quality question)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(evaluation, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(evaluation, has quality questions)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(observation, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(observation, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(practice, improve performance)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(practice, be good for business)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(practice, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(practice, make perfect)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(instrument, has quality good)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(tool, is best)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(evaluation, has quality questions)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(evaluation, has quality question)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(outlier, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(experiment, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(evaluation, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(practice, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(instrument, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(practice, be good for business)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(practice, improve performance)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(practice, make perfect)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(observation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(tool, is best)