prohibition: was good

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 good 1.00
was bad 0.92
is good thing 0.85
was important to 1920s 0.85
has quality good 0.84
was hard 0.83
has quality bad 0.81
was good for america 0.78
was difficult 0.78
was successful 0.76

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

0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(provision, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(movement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(policy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(provision, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(policy, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(provision, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(provision, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(movement, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(provision, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(provision, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(movement, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(policy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(common law, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(ordinance, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(amendment, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(mandate, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(common law, has quality good)
...

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(provision, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(policy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(movement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(provision, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(legislation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(legislation, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(amendment, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(amendment, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
Remarkable(common law, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(common law, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(common law, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(common law, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(mandate, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(mandate, has quality good)
...

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(prohibition, was good)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(prohibition, was bad)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(prohibition, is good thing)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Salient(prohibition, has quality good)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(prohibition, was bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(prohibition, was bad)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(prohibition, was good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(policy, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(provision, has quality bad)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(provision, has quality good)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(movement, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(common law, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(ordinance, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(legislation, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(amendment, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(amendment, has quality bad)
...

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(policy, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(provision, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(provision, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(prohibition, was good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(movement, has quality bad)