physics: be related to technology

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents science
Weight: 0.67
, department
Weight: 0.64
, class
Weight: 0.59
, field
Weight: 0.58
, teacher
Weight: 0.56
Siblings quantum physics
Weight: 0.70
, computer science
Weight: 0.38
, mathematics
Weight: 0.37
, biology
Weight: 0.36
, metaphysics
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
be related to technology 1.00
relate in technology 0.90
affect development of technology 0.88
be contribute to technology 0.86
produce different technologies 0.84
be related 0.83
be related to clinical technology studies 0.80
be related to health 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(science, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(physics, be related to technology)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(science, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(physics, be related to technology)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(class, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(physics, be related to technology)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(science, be related to technology)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(class, be related)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(science, be related)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.13
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(class, be related)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.13
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(science, be related)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.05
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Remarkable(science, be related to technology)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(biology, be related)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.41
Plausible(science, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(physics, be related to technology)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(science, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(physics, be related to technology)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(class, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(physics, be related to technology)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(biology, be related) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(biology, be related)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(physics, be related to technology)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(physics, relate in technology)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(physics, relate in technology)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(physics, be contribute to technology)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to clinical technology studies)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(physics, relate in technology)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(physics, relate in technology)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(physics, be contribute to technology)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.95
Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to health)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(physics, be contribute to technology)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(physics, be contribute to technology)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(physics, be related)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(physics, be related to clinical technology studies)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(physics, be related to health)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(physics, be related to health)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(physics, be related)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(physics, be related to health)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Plausible(physics, be related to clinical technology studies)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(physics, be related)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(physics, be related to clinical technology studies)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(physics, be related to technology)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(science, be related to technology)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(class, be related)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(science, be related)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Remarkable(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(biology, be related)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(science, be related to technology)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(class, be related)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(physics, be related to technology) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(science, be related)