profit: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents value
Weight: 0.60
, motive
Weight: 0.60
, report
Weight: 0.59
, statement
Weight: 0.58
Siblings cent
Weight: 0.60
, speculator
Weight: 0.42
, revenue
Weight: 0.35
, equity
Weight: 0.32
, bank statement
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96

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: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(equity, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(cent, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(revenue, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.20
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(equity, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(equity, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(equity, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(revenue, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(revenue, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(cent, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(cent, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(equity, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(equity, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(profit, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Typical(profit, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(equity, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(revenue, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(cent, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(profit, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(equity, has quality bad)