prohibition: was difficult

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents law
Weight: 0.66
, policy
Weight: 0.65
, rule
Weight: 0.65
, provision
Weight: 0.62
, movement
Weight: 0.60
Siblings common law
Weight: 0.36
, ordinance
Weight: 0.36
, amendment
Weight: 0.35
, legislation
Weight: 0.34
, mandate
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
was difficult 1.00
was hard 0.85
was important to 1920s 0.82
is hard 0.81
was good 0.78
was bad 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

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(amendment, is hard)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(amendment, is hard)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(amendment, is hard)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(prohibition, was difficult)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was hard)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was important to 1920s)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, is hard)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was bad)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(prohibition, was hard)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(prohibition, is hard)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(prohibition, was important to 1920s)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was hard)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(prohibition, was hard)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(prohibition, was bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(prohibition, was good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(prohibition, is hard)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(prohibition, is hard)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was important to 1920s)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(prohibition, was important to 1920s)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(prohibition, was bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(prohibition, was difficult)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was difficult)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(amendment, is hard)