programming: be much easier than fields

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents computer science
Weight: 0.61
, operation
Weight: 0.58
, item
Weight: 0.57
, feature
Weight: 0.57
Siblings computer programming
Weight: 0.71
, tv show
Weight: 0.64
, comedy
Weight: 0.62
, broadcast
Weight: 0.55
, programming language
Weight: 0.38

Related properties

Property Similarity
be much easier than fields 1.00
be much easier than other fields 0.99
be harder than drama 0.77
be better than movies 0.76
cost much more in america 0.76
is even important 0.76
has quality better 0.76
be less rare than common ones 0.76
become more important 0.75

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

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(operation, cost much more in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(programming, be much easier than fields)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(operation, cost much more in america)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(operation, cost much more in america)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(tv show, be better than movies)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(computer programming, become more important)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(comedy, be harder than drama)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(comedy, is even important)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(operation, cost much more in america) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(comedy, is even important) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(comedy, is even important)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(comedy, be harder than drama) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(comedy, be harder than drama)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(computer programming, become more important) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(computer programming, become more important)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(tv show, be better than movies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(tv show, be better than movies)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Salient(programming, be much easier than fields)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than other fields)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(programming, be much easier than other fields)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(programming, be much easier than other fields)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.99
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(programming, be much easier than other fields)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(programming, has quality better)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(programming, has quality better)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(programming, has quality better)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(programming, has quality better)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Salient(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Plausible(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(programming, be much easier than fields)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(operation, cost much more in america)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(comedy, be harder than drama)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(comedy, is even important)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(tv show, be better than movies)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(computer programming, become more important)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.58
Typical(programming, be much easier than fields) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(operation, cost much more in america)