salesman: has state job

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents employee
Weight: 0.69
, con artist
Weight: 0.57
, film
Weight: 0.53
, person
Weight: 0.52
Siblings stockbroker
Weight: 0.46
, salesperson
Weight: 0.37
, office worker
Weight: 0.35
, engineer
Weight: 0.35
, plumber
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state job 1.00
is work 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

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(engineer, has state job)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(plumber, is work)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(engineer, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(engineer, has state job)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(plumber, is work) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(plumber, is work)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(salesman, has state job)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
Typical(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(salesman, is work)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(salesman, is work)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(salesman, is work)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(salesman, is work)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(salesman, has state job)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(salesman, has state job)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(engineer, has state job)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(salesman, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(plumber, is work)