rasp: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents instrument
Weight: 0.48
, tool
Weight: 0.47
, device
Weight: 0.43
, market
Weight: 0.30
Siblings acoustic guitar
Weight: 0.32
, bass guitar
Weight: 0.32
, synthesizer
Weight: 0.32
, glockenspiel
Weight: 0.32
, percussion instrument
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality worth 0.82
has quality price 0.78
is terrible 0.77
has quality questions 0.75
help poor 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(instrument, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(device, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(market, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(market, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(tool, has quality worth)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(market, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(market, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(device, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(instrument, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(tool, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(tool, has quality worth)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(market, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(device, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(tool, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(instrument, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(market, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(tool, has quality worth)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(bass guitar, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(acoustic guitar, has quality price)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(instrument, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(device, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(market, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(market, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(tool, has quality worth)
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(bass guitar, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Plausible(bass guitar, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(acoustic guitar, has quality price)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(acoustic guitar, has quality price)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(rasp, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality good)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(rasp, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(rasp, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(rasp, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(market, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(market, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(device, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(instrument, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(tool, has quality worth)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(bass guitar, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(acoustic guitar, has quality price)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(market, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(market, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(device, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(instrument, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(rasp, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(tool, has quality worth)