possum: be problem in new zealand

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents marsupial
Weight: 0.68
, wild animal
Weight: 0.64
, creature
Weight: 0.59
, mammal
Weight: 0.53
, animal
Weight: 0.52
Siblings sugar glider
Weight: 0.56
, rabbit
Weight: 0.37
, wallaby
Weight: 0.37
, kangaroo
Weight: 0.37
, opossum
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
be problem in new zealand 1.00
be problem in zealand 0.98
be bad in new zealand 0.94
be in new zealand 0.94
be bad in zealand 0.92
be in zealand 0.92
were introduced into new zealand 0.88
were introduced into zealand 0.87
have in new zealand pests 0.85
be pest in new zealand 0.85

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

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(wallaby, have in new zealand pests)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(wallaby, have in new zealand pests) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(wallaby, have in new zealand pests)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(possum, be problem in new zealand)

Similarity expansion

0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(possum, be in new zealand)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(possum, be bad in new zealand)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
Typical(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(possum, be in new zealand)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(possum, be in new zealand)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.90
Typical(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(possum, be bad in new zealand)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(possum, be problem in new zealand)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(possum, be problem in new zealand)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(possum, be problem in new zealand) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(wallaby, have in new zealand pests)