online banking: has quality worth

Related concepts

Parents	financial institution Weight: 0.75 , banking Weight: 0.74 , internet Weight: 0.72 , bank Weight: 0.70
Siblings	mortgage lender Weight: 0.38 , bank statement Weight: 0.36 , reserve bank Weight: 0.36 , business Weight: 0.35 , hsbc Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality worth	1.00
has quality good	0.85
has quality better	0.83

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.54

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(internet, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)

0.53

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.88

Plausible(bank, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.77

Plausible(banking, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)

0.49

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.44

Plausible(banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(banking, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.44

¬ Plausible(banking, has quality worth)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.68

¬ Plausible(banking, has quality better)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Plausible(banking, has quality good)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Plausible(bank, has quality good)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Plausible(internet, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.16

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Remarkable(internet, has quality good)

0.15

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality good)

0.14

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Remarkable(bank, has quality good)

0.13

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality better)

0.11

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Remarkable(banking, has quality worth)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.03

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(hsbc, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.44

Plausible(banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality worth)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(internet, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality worth)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.88

Plausible(bank, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality worth)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.77

Plausible(banking, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality worth)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(banking, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.58

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality worth)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

Remarkable(hsbc, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Plausible(hsbc, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Salient(online banking, has quality worth)

Similarity expansion

0.66

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality good)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.87

Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality better)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.81

Salient(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

¬ Salient(online banking, has quality good)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.81

Salient(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Salient(online banking, has quality better)

0.49

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.73

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality better)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Plausible(online banking, has quality good)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality better)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.81

Salient(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.58

Plausible(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(online banking, has quality worth)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.25

¬ Typical(banking, has quality worth)

0.19

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Typical(banking, has quality better)

0.15

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Typical(banking, has quality good)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(bank, has quality good)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Typical(internet, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Typical(hsbc, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.42

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.25

¬ Typical(banking, has quality worth)

0.27

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Typical(banking, has quality better)

0.25

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Typical(banking, has quality good)

0.22

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(bank, has quality good)

0.21

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.85

Evidence: 0.48

Typical(online banking, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Typical(internet, has quality good)