reef: be under threat

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents structure
Weight: 0.61
, island
Weight: 0.58
, brand
Weight: 0.51
, beach
Weight: 0.49
Siblings great barrier reef
Weight: 0.82
, cayman islands
Weight: 0.36
, rhode island
Weight: 0.36
, staten island
Weight: 0.36
, long island
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
be under threat 1.00
be in danger 0.84

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

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(great barrier reef, be in danger)
0.01
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.10
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(great barrier reef, be under threat)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.60
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
Remarkable(great barrier reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(great barrier reef, be under threat)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(great barrier reef, be in danger) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(great barrier reef, be in danger)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(reef, be under threat)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(reef, be in danger)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(reef, be in danger)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(reef, be in danger)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.27
Typical(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(reef, be in danger)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(reef, be under threat)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(reef, be under threat)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(great barrier reef, be under threat)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(reef, be under threat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(great barrier reef, be in danger)