photography: be better than painting

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents hobby
Weight: 0.67
, art
Weight: 0.65
, medium
Weight: 0.64
, invention
Weight: 0.64
, passion
Weight: 0.62
Siblings painting
Weight: 0.35
, watercolor
Weight: 0.35
, calligraphy
Weight: 0.34
, needlework
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be better than painting 1.00
be different than art 0.83
be than better photography 0.81
be different to art 0.79
be different from art 0.79
was different from art 0.79
be different to other art 0.79
be like art 0.78
be better than colour 0.78
works of be most famous art 0.77

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: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(painting, be than better photography)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.06
Plausible(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(painting, be than better photography) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(painting, be than better photography)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
Plausible(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Salient(photography, be better than painting)

Similarity expansion

0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.05
Remarkable(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(photography, be better than colour)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.30
Typical(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(photography, be better than colour)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.06
Salient(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(photography, be better than colour)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.06
Plausible(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(photography, be better than colour)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
Salient(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(photography, be better than painting)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
Plausible(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(photography, be better than painting)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(photography, be better than painting) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(painting, be than better photography)