reimbursement: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents amount
Weight: 0.61
, service
Weight: 0.61
, fee
Weight: 0.59
, claim
Weight: 0.59
, condition
Weight: 0.58
Siblings health insurance
Weight: 0.33
, escort service
Weight: 0.33
, hospital care
Weight: 0.32
, postal service
Weight: 0.32
, tuition
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality right 0.88
is quality 0.87
be bad in bulgaria 0.87
improve quality 0.81
is bad people 0.80
be for service bad 0.78
improve quality of education 0.77
be in bad weather 0.76

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

0.55
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(claim, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(fee, be for service bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(fee, be for service bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(claim, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(service, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(service, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(fee, be for service bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(claim, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(service, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(service, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(health insurance, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Remarkable(tuition, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(tuition, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(health insurance, has quality right)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(health insurance, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(tuition, improve quality)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(tuition, improve quality of education)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(claim, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.18
Plausible(fee, be for service bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
Remarkable(health insurance, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(health insurance, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
Remarkable(tuition, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(tuition, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(health insurance, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(health insurance, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tuition, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(tuition, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(health insurance, has quality right) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(health insurance, has quality right)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(tuition, improve quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(tuition, improve quality)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(tuition, improve quality of education) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(tuition, improve quality of education)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Salient(reimbursement, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(reimbursement, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(reimbursement, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Salient(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.54
Plausible(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(claim, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(service, is quality)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(fee, be for service bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(health insurance, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(tuition, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(tuition, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(health insurance, has quality right)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(tuition, improve quality)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(health insurance, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(tuition, improve quality of education)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(claim, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(service, is quality)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(reimbursement, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(fee, be for service bad)