receptionist: has quality questions

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents employee
Weight: 0.69
, woman
Weight: 0.69
, position
Weight: 0.58
, job
Weight: 0.57
, person
Weight: 0.57
Siblings waitress
Weight: 0.36
, salesperson
Weight: 0.36
, waiter
Weight: 0.35
, pregnant woman
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality questions 1.00
questions 0.92
has quality bad 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

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(salesperson, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(waiter, has quality questions)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(waiter, questions)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(waiter, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(waiter, has quality questions)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(waiter, questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(waiter, questions)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(salesperson, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(salesperson, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(receptionist, has quality questions)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(receptionist, questions)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.80
Salient(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(receptionist, questions)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(receptionist, questions)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, questions)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.80
Salient(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(receptionist, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(receptionist, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(receptionist, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Salient(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(receptionist, has quality questions)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(waiter, questions)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(waiter, has quality questions)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(salesperson, has quality bad)