rigger: wear red hats

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents worker
Weight: 0.47
, position
Weight: 0.45
, contractor
Weight: 0.44
, service
Weight: 0.39
, trade
Weight: 0.38
Siblings construction worker
Weight: 0.32
, electrician
Weight: 0.31
, machinist
Weight: 0.31
, office worker
Weight: 0.31
, fireman
Weight: 0.30

Related properties

Property Similarity
wear red hats 1.00
wear hats 0.97

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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(construction worker, wear hats)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(electrician, wear hats)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(fireman, wear hats)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(fireman, wear hats)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(fireman, wear hats)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(electrician, wear hats)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(electrician, wear hats)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(construction worker, wear hats)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(construction worker, wear hats)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Salient(rigger, wear red hats)

Similarity expansion

0.83
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(rigger, wear hats)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(rigger, wear hats)
0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(rigger, wear hats)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear hats)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Salient(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(rigger, wear red hats)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(fireman, wear hats)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(construction worker, wear hats)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(rigger, wear red hats)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(electrician, wear hats)