production: has physical part process

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents adaptation
Weight: 0.62
, business activity
Weight: 0.60
, sector
Weight: 0.59
, aspect
Weight: 0.58
, variable
Weight: 0.58
Siblings consumption
Weight: 0.58
, manufacturing
Weight: 0.34
, oil company
Weight: 0.33
, automobile industry
Weight: 0.32
, film
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has physical part process 1.00
all play part in process 0.89
was used in process 0.87
all play part in process of evolution 0.86

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

0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(adaptation, all play part in process of evolution) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(production, has physical part process)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(adaptation, all play part in process of evolution)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(adaptation, all play part in process of evolution)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.15
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(manufacturing, was used in process)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(adaptation, all play part in process of evolution) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(production, has physical part process)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
Remarkable(manufacturing, was used in process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Plausible(manufacturing, was used in process)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Salient(production, has physical part process)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(production, has physical part process)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(production, has physical part process)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.13
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(adaptation, all play part in process of evolution)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(manufacturing, was used in process)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.13
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.17
Typical(production, has physical part process) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(adaptation, all play part in process of evolution)