paper: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents newspaper
Weight: 0.68
, paper towel
Weight: 0.68
, raw material
Weight: 0.60
, publication
Weight: 0.60
Siblings toilet paper
Weight: 0.71
, white paper
Weight: 0.66
, paper currency
Weight: 0.64
, thesis
Weight: 0.61
, passport
Weight: 0.59

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality change 0.86
be bad for environment 0.80
be when good 0.78
improve print quality 0.76
be bad playing 0.76
has quality uses 0.76

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

0.60
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(paper towel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(newspaper, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(paper towel, has quality uses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper towel, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(newspaper, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.17
Plausible(paper towel, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper towel, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(paper towel, be bad for environment)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(newspaper, be bad for environment)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(newspaper, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(paper towel, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(paper towel, has quality uses)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.57
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper towel, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(paper towel, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(newspaper, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(paper towel, be bad for environment)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(newspaper, be bad for environment)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(paper towel, has quality uses)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(toilet paper, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(thesis, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(toilet paper, be bad for environment)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(paper towel, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(newspaper, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper towel, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(paper towel, has quality uses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(newspaper, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.17
Plausible(paper towel, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(toilet paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(toilet paper, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(thesis, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(thesis, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
Remarkable(toilet paper, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(toilet paper, be bad for environment)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Salient(paper, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(paper, be bad for environment)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.13
Salient(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Salient(paper, be bad for environment)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(paper, be bad for environment)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(paper, be bad for environment)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(paper, has quality good)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(paper, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.13
Salient(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(paper, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Salient(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(paper, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(paper towel, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(newspaper, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(paper towel, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(paper towel, be bad for environment)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(newspaper, be bad for environment)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(paper towel, has quality uses)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(toilet paper, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(thesis, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(toilet paper, be bad for environment)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(paper towel, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(paper towel, be bad for environment)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(newspaper, be bad for environment)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(newspaper, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(paper towel, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Typical(paper, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(paper towel, has quality uses)