proprietor: has quality use

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents owner
Weight: 0.63
, person
Weight: 0.56
, man
Weight: 0.53
Siblings pet owner
Weight: 0.33
, entrepreneur
Weight: 0.33
, businessman
Weight: 0.33
, landlord
Weight: 0.33
, bartender
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality use 1.00
has quality good 0.88
has quality bad 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(bartender, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(businessman, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(entrepreneur, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(entrepreneur, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(entrepreneur, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(businessman, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(businessman, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(bartender, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(bartender, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(proprietor, has quality use)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality good)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(proprietor, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(proprietor, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(proprietor, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(proprietor, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(proprietor, has quality bad)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(proprietor, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(proprietor, has quality use)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(businessman, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(entrepreneur, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(proprietor, has quality use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(bartender, has quality bad)