rolling: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents move
Weight: 0.62
, process
Weight: 0.60
, method
Weight: 0.57
, hit
Weight: 0.56
, feature
Weight: 0.52
Siblings spinning
Weight: 0.32
, jumping
Weight: 0.32
, grinding
Weight: 0.32
, swing
Weight: 0.32
, slide
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
is quality 0.87
has quality wrong 0.87
has quality change 0.86
is low quality 0.82
feel good 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

0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(hit, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(hit, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(hit, is quality)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(process, is quality)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(hit, is low quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(hit, is low quality)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(hit, is quality)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(process, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(jumping, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(grinding, has quality better)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(jumping, has quality wrong)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(grinding, feel good)
...

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(rolling, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(rolling, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(hit, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(rolling, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(hit, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(rolling, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(grinding, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(grinding, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(jumping, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(jumping, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(grinding, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(grinding, has quality change)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
Remarkable(grinding, feel good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(grinding, feel good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(grinding, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(grinding, has quality better)
...

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Salient(rolling, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(rolling, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.38
Salient(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(rolling, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
Salient(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(rolling, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(hit, is quality)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(hit, is low quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(grinding, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(jumping, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(grinding, has quality change)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(grinding, feel good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(grinding, has quality better)
...

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(hit, is quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(rolling, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(hit, is low quality)