pothole: be bad year

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents problem
Weight: 0.63
, thing
Weight: 0.55
, hazard
Weight: 0.55
, service
Weight: 0.54
, issue
Weight: 0.54
Siblings thyroid problem
Weight: 0.33
, mental health problem
Weight: 0.32
, toothache
Weight: 0.32
, flat tire
Weight: 0.32
, sinkhole
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be bad year 1.00
appear year 0.80
has quality bad 0.79
be bad for cars 0.77
be worse in winter 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

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(toothache, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(sinkhole, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(sinkhole, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(sinkhole, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.47
Remarkable(toothache, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(toothache, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Salient(pothole, be bad year)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Salient(pothole, appear year)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(pothole, appear year)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(pothole, appear year)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(pothole, appear year)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(pothole, be bad for cars)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(pothole, has quality bad)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
Typical(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(pothole, be worse in winter)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(pothole, be bad for cars)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(pothole, be bad for cars)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(pothole, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be bad for cars)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(pothole, be worse in winter)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be worse in winter)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(pothole, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(pothole, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(pothole, be worse in winter)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Salient(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(pothole, be bad year)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(sinkhole, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(pothole, be bad year)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(toothache, has quality bad)