rock music: was controversial

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents music
Weight: 0.71
, style
Weight: 0.63
, thing
Weight: 0.60
, musician
Weight: 0.60
Siblings classical music
Weight: 0.71
, pop music
Weight: 0.67
, prog
Weight: 0.40

Related properties

Property Similarity
was controversial 1.00
was popular 0.79
is unpopular 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(classical music, is unpopular)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
Remarkable(classical music, is unpopular) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(classical music, is unpopular)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(rock music, was controversial)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(rock music, was popular)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(rock music, is unpopular)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(rock music, is unpopular)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.63
Salient(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(rock music, is unpopular)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rock music, is unpopular)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(rock music, was popular)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.63
Salient(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(rock music, was popular)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(rock music, was popular)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Salient(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(rock music, was controversial)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(rock music, was controversial)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(rock music, was controversial) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Typical(classical music, is unpopular)