poison ivy: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents vine
Weight: 0.76
, vegetation
Weight: 0.67
, species
Weight: 0.67
, tree
Weight: 0.67
Siblings cherry tree
Weight: 0.37
, apple tree
Weight: 0.36
, maple tree
Weight: 0.36
, oak tree
Weight: 0.36
, hemlock
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality evil 0.80
be bad year 0.79
feel good 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

0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(species, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(vine, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(vine, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(species, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(vine, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(species, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(oak tree, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(species, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(vine, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(oak tree, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(oak tree, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(poison ivy, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(poison ivy, has quality good)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(poison ivy, has quality good)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality good)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(poison ivy, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(poison ivy, be bad year)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Salient(poison ivy, feel good)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(poison ivy, be bad year)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, be bad year)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(poison ivy, feel good)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(poison ivy, be bad year)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(poison ivy, feel good)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(poison ivy, has quality evil)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(poison ivy, has quality evil)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, feel good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(poison ivy, has quality evil)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality evil)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Salient(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(vine, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(species, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(oak tree, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(vine, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(poison ivy, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(species, has quality good)