raising: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents subject
Weight: 0.51
, matter
Weight: 0.49
, stage
Weight: 0.47
, thing
Weight: 0.45
, event
Weight: 0.41
Siblings raise
Weight: 0.32
, public speaking
Weight: 0.30
, drawing
Weight: 0.30
, talking
Weight: 0.29
, financing
Weight: 0.29

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
is good bad idea 0.80
be bad for environment 0.80
is terrible 0.77
is good thing 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(raise, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(drawing, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(talking, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(drawing, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(talking, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(financing, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(financing, is good thing)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
Remarkable(raise, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(raise, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(financing, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(financing, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(talking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(talking, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(drawing, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(drawing, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(financing, is good thing) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Plausible(financing, is good thing)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(talking, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(talking, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(drawing, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(drawing, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Salient(raising, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(raising, be bad for environment)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(raising, be bad for environment)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.14
Salient(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Salient(raising, be bad for environment)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(raising, is good bad idea)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(raising, is good bad idea)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.14
Salient(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Salient(raising, is good bad idea)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(raising, is terrible)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(raising, is terrible)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(raising, be bad for environment)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.14
Salient(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Salient(raising, is terrible)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(raising, is good bad idea)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(raising, is terrible)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(raising, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(raising, is good thing)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(raising, is good thing)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(raising, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(raising, is good thing)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.14
Salient(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(raising, is good thing)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.18
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.14
Salient(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(raising, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Salient(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(raising, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(raise, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(talking, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(drawing, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(financing, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(talking, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(drawing, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(raising, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Typical(financing, is good thing)