prototype: be rated mature

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents device
Weight: 0.63
, design
Weight: 0.63
, project
Weight: 0.62
, design pattern
Weight: 0.62
Siblings electronic device
Weight: 0.34
, robot
Weight: 0.34
, network device
Weight: 0.34
, galvanometer
Weight: 0.34
, tablet computer
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be rated mature 1.00
be rated 0.89
be rated at 025 0.87
is 2 rated m 0.79
be rated pg 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(device, be rated at 025) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(prototype, be rated mature)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.33
Plausible(design, be rated) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(prototype, be rated mature)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(design, be rated)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(device, be rated at 025)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(device, be rated at 025)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(design, be rated)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(electronic device, be rated at 025)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(device, be rated at 025) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(prototype, be rated mature)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.33
Plausible(design, be rated) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(prototype, be rated mature)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(electronic device, be rated at 025) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(electronic device, be rated at 025)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(prototype, be rated mature)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Salient(prototype, is 2 rated m)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(prototype, is 2 rated m)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Typical(prototype, is 2 rated m)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(prototype, is 2 rated m)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(prototype, be rated mature)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(design, be rated)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(device, be rated at 025)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(electronic device, be rated at 025)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(design, be rated)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(prototype, be rated mature) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(device, be rated at 025)