opal: is non-renewable resource

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents gem
Weight: 0.72
, stone
Weight: 0.59
, mineral
Weight: 0.49
, jewelry
Weight: 0.42
Siblings ruby
Weight: 0.37
, sapphire
Weight: 0.36
, amethyst
Weight: 0.35
, aquamarine
Weight: 0.35
, topaz
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
is non-renewable resource 1.00
has quality resource 0.94

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: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(mineral, has quality resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(opal, is non-renewable resource)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(mineral, has quality resource)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(mineral, has quality resource)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(mineral, has quality resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
Remarkable(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(opal, is non-renewable resource)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(opal, is non-renewable resource)

Similarity expansion

0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(opal, has quality resource)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(opal, has quality resource)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.24
Remarkable(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(opal, has quality resource)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.29
Salient(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(opal, has quality resource)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.29
Salient(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(opal, is non-renewable resource)

Typical implies Plausible

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(opal, is non-renewable resource)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(mineral, has quality resource)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(opal, is non-renewable resource) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(mineral, has quality resource)