router: has physical part antennas

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents network device
Weight: 0.69
, computer hardware
Weight: 0.66
, electronic device
Weight: 0.65
, hardware
Weight: 0.63
, software
Weight: 0.62
Siblings modem
Weight: 0.38
, computer network
Weight: 0.38
, laptop computer
Weight: 0.37
, server
Weight: 0.37
, motherboard
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
has physical part antennas 1.00
have 2 antennas 0.94
have multiple antennas 0.93
is wireless 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

0.02
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(modem, is wireless)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.91
Remarkable(modem, is wireless)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(modem, is wireless)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(router, has physical part antennas)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(router, have 2 antennas)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(router, have multiple antennas)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.35
Typical(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Typical(router, is wireless)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(router, have 2 antennas)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(router, have multiple antennas)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Plausible(router, is wireless)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(router, is wireless)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(router, is wireless)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(router, have multiple antennas)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(router, have 2 antennas)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.35
Typical(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(router, have multiple antennas)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.35
Typical(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(router, have 2 antennas)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(router, has physical part antennas)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(router, has physical part antennas)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(router, has physical part antennas)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(modem, is wireless)