reptile: be different from amphibian

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents wild animal
Weight: 0.68
, creature
Weight: 0.63
, animal
Weight: 0.62
, thing
Weight: 0.60
, cold blooded animal
Weight: 0.59
Siblings frog
Weight: 0.78
, turtle
Weight: 0.77
, lizard
Weight: 0.76
, alligator
Weight: 0.75
, monitor lizard
Weight: 0.73

Related properties

Property Similarity
be different from amphibian 1.00
be different from amphibians 0.86
develop from species of amphibians 0.85
is amphibians 0.83
be related to amphibians 0.82
be more developed than amphibians 0.82
evolve from amphibians 0.82
be better than amphibians 0.82
be on better land than amphibians 0.81
be more advanced than amphibians 0.80

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

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(frog, is amphibians)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
Remarkable(frog, is amphibians) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(frog, is amphibians)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(reptile, be different from amphibian)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(reptile, develop from species of amphibians)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(reptile, be better than amphibians)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(reptile, be related to amphibians)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.37
Typical(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(reptile, develop from species of amphibians)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(reptile, develop from species of amphibians)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(reptile, develop from species of amphibians)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(reptile, be related to amphibians)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(reptile, be better than amphibians)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(reptile, be related to amphibians)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(reptile, be better than amphibians)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.37
Typical(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(reptile, be related to amphibians)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.37
Typical(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(reptile, be better than amphibians)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
Salient(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(reptile, be different from amphibian)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(reptile, be different from amphibian)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(reptile, be different from amphibian) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(frog, is amphibians)