rome: was successful

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents civilization
Weight: 0.63
, republic
Weight: 0.60
, village
Weight: 0.58
, gentile
Weight: 0.58
Siblings egypt
Weight: 0.35
, georgia
Weight: 0.33
, roman republic
Weight: 0.33
, roman empire
Weight: 0.33
, islam
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
was successful 1.00
was successful building 0.89
was successful on trade 0.85

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

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(roman empire, was successful)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(roman empire, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(roman empire, was successful)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(rome, was successful)

Similarity expansion

0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Salient(rome, was successful building)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(rome, was successful building)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(rome, was successful building)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(rome, was successful on trade)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(rome, was successful on trade)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(rome, was successful building)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(rome, was successful on trade)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(rome, was successful on trade)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.97
Salient(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(rome, was successful)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(rome, was successful)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(rome, was successful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(roman empire, was successful)