partnership: has quality better

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents agreement
Weight: 0.65
, relationship
Weight: 0.61
, strategy
Weight: 0.60
, issue
Weight: 0.58
, commitment
Weight: 0.58
Siblings friendship
Weight: 0.33
, contract
Weight: 0.33
, merger
Weight: 0.33
, acquisition
Weight: 0.33
, pact
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality better 1.00
has quality good 0.94
has quality bad 0.90
be better than love 0.83
has quality worth 0.83
be better for business 0.82
is good leadership quality 0.80
be better than ones 0.80
has quality price 0.79
be better in beginning 0.78

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

0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(strategy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(agreement, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(commitment, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(commitment, is good leadership quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(relationship, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(relationship, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(commitment, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(agreement, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(strategy, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(commitment, is good leadership quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(relationship, has quality bad)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(agreement, has quality good)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(strategy, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(commitment, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(commitment, is good leadership quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(friendship, be better than love)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(pact, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(merger, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(merger, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(contract, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(pact, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(contract, has quality price)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.16
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(friendship, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(strategy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality better)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(agreement, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality better)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(commitment, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality better)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(relationship, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality better)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(commitment, is good leadership quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality better)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(friendship, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(friendship, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(pact, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(pact, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(contract, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(contract, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(merger, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(merger, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(pact, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(pact, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(merger, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(merger, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(acquisition, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(acquisition, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(contract, has quality price) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(contract, has quality price)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(friendship, be better than love) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(friendship, be better than love)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(partnership, has quality better)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(partnership, be better for business)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(partnership, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(partnership, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(partnership, be better for business)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(partnership, be better for business)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(partnership, be better for business)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(partnership, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(commitment, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(relationship, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(commitment, is good leadership quality)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(agreement, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(strategy, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(friendship, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(friendship, be better than love)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(pact, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(pact, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(contract, has quality price)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(contract, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(merger, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(merger, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(acquisition, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(commitment, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(relationship, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(agreement, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(commitment, is good leadership quality)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(partnership, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(strategy, has quality good)