partner: has state relationships

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents family member
Weight: 0.71
, attorney
Weight: 0.65
, manager
Weight: 0.63
, user
Weight: 0.58
Siblings law firm
Weight: 0.68
, owner
Weight: 0.67
, representative
Weight: 0.65
, employee
Weight: 0.65
, spouse
Weight: 0.64

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state relationships 1.00
change relationships 0.91
stay in relationships 0.89
be previous relationships 0.87
change existing relationships 0.86
stay in abusive relationships 0.82
cheat in relationship 0.80

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(spouse, stay in abusive relationships)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(spouse, stay in relationships)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(spouse, stay in relationships)
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Plausible(spouse, stay in relationships)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(spouse, stay in abusive relationships)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(spouse, stay in abusive relationships)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(partner, has state relationships)

Similarity expansion

0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Typical(partner, stay in relationships)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Salient(partner, change relationships)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(partner, stay in relationships)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(partner, change relationships)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Salient(partner, stay in relationships)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(partner, change relationships)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Salient(partner, stay in abusive relationships)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(partner, stay in abusive relationships)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(partner, stay in abusive relationships)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Salient(partner, change existing relationships)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Salient(partner, cheat in relationship)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(partner, stay in abusive relationships)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(partner, be previous relationships)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Plausible(partner, change existing relationships)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(partner, cheat in relationship)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(partner, change existing relationships)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(partner, change existing relationships)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(partner, be previous relationships)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(partner, cheat in relationship)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(partner, change relationships)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(partner, cheat in relationship)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(partner, be previous relationships)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.76
Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(partner, be previous relationships)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(partner, stay in relationships)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(partner, has state relationships)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(spouse, stay in relationships)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(partner, has state relationships)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(spouse, stay in abusive relationships)