paradox: affect technocray

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents concept
Weight: 0.56
, thing
Weight: 0.56
, term
Weight: 0.55
, topic
Weight: 0.55
Siblings liar
Weight: 0.50
, irony
Weight: 0.35
, duality
Weight: 0.34
, contradiction
Weight: 0.33
, dilemma
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
affect technocray 1.00
mean 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

0.37
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(concept, mean)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(paradox, affect technocray)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(concept, mean)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(concept, mean)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(contradiction, mean)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(duality, mean)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(irony, mean)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(dilemma, mean)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(concept, mean)
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(dilemma, mean)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(dilemma, mean)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(irony, mean)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Plausible(irony, mean)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(contradiction, mean)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(contradiction, mean)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.54
Remarkable(duality, mean)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Plausible(duality, mean)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(paradox, affect technocray)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(paradox, mean)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(paradox, mean)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(paradox, mean)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Salient(paradox, mean)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(paradox, affect technocray)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(concept, mean)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(dilemma, mean)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(irony, mean)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(contradiction, mean)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(duality, mean)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(paradox, affect technocray)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(concept, mean)