planning: has state complex

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents strategy
Weight: 0.69
, stage
Weight: 0.64
, step
Weight: 0.62
, preparation
Weight: 0.62
Siblings marketing
Weight: 0.34
, plan
Weight: 0.34
, social engineering
Weight: 0.33
, development
Weight: 0.32
, approach
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state complex 1.00
has state environment 0.75
has state problem 0.75

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

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(marketing, has state environment)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(marketing, has state problem)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(marketing, has state environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(marketing, has state environment)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(marketing, has state problem) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(marketing, has state problem)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(planning, has state complex)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(planning, has state complex)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(planning, has state complex)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(marketing, has state environment)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(planning, has state complex) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(marketing, has state problem)