pet: be beneficial to humans

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents animal
Weight: 0.67
, friend
Weight: 0.64
, creature
Weight: 0.64
Siblings hamster
Weight: 0.74
, guinea pig
Weight: 0.71
, monkey
Weight: 0.70
, snake
Weight: 0.69
, dog
Weight: 0.69

Related properties

Property Similarity
be beneficial to humans 1.00
be important to humans 0.92
help humans 0.86
attack humans 0.76
be helpful 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(snake, attack humans)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(snake, attack humans)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(snake, attack humans)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(pet, be beneficial to humans)

Similarity expansion

0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(pet, be important to humans)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(pet, help humans)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(pet, be important to humans)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(pet, help humans)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(pet, help humans)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(pet, be important to humans)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(pet, attack humans)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(pet, attack humans)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(pet, attack humans)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(pet, be important to humans)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(pet, attack humans)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(pet, be helpful)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(pet, be helpful)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(pet, help humans)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(pet, be helpful)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(pet, be helpful)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(pet, be beneficial to humans)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(pet, be beneficial to humans)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(snake, attack humans)