opossum: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents animal
Weight: 0.73
, marsupial
Weight: 0.70
, mammal
Weight: 0.65
, wildlife
Weight: 0.60
Siblings coyote
Weight: 0.38
, boa constrictor
Weight: 0.38
, llama
Weight: 0.37
, raccoon
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
is quality 0.87
has quality questions 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

0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(marsupial, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(marsupial, is quality)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(opossum, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(marsupial, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(marsupial, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.29
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(marsupial, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(marsupial, is quality)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(marsupial, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(marsupial, is quality)
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(opossum, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(opossum, has quality good)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(opossum, has quality good)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(opossum, has quality good)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(opossum, is quality)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(opossum, is quality)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(opossum, is quality)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(opossum, has quality questions)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality good)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(opossum, has quality questions)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(opossum, has quality questions)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(opossum, is quality)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality questions)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(opossum, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(marsupial, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(marsupial, is quality)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(marsupial, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.94
Typical(opossum, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(marsupial, is quality)