power line: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents line
Weight: 0.75
, utility
Weight: 0.70
, equipment
Weight: 0.66
, facility
Weight: 0.63
Siblings straight line
Weight: 0.39
, red line
Weight: 0.39
, blue line
Weight: 0.38
, telephone line
Weight: 0.38
, power plant
Weight: 0.38

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
be good for environment 0.80
has quality function 0.78
be bad for environment 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: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(power plant, be bad for environment)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(blue line, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(power plant, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(power plant, be good for environment)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(straight line, has quality function)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(power plant, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(power plant, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(blue line, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(blue line, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(straight line, has quality function)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(straight line, has quality function)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(power plant, be good for environment)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(power plant, be good for environment)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(power plant, be bad for environment)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(power plant, be bad for environment)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(power line, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.80
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Salient(power line, has quality bad)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality bad)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(power line, has quality bad)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(power line, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(power line, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(power plant, be bad for environment)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(straight line, has quality function)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(power plant, be good for environment)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(power plant, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(power line, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(blue line, has quality bad)