saving: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.58
, operation
Weight: 0.55
, feature
Weight: 0.54
, topic
Weight: 0.51
, issue
Weight: 0.49
Siblings screen saver
Weight: 0.34
, giving
Weight: 0.31
, human life
Weight: 0.31
, living thing
Weight: 0.31
, talking
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(giving, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(talking, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(giving, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(talking, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(giving, feel good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(talking, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(talking, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(giving, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(giving, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
Remarkable(talking, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(talking, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(giving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(giving, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(giving, feel good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(giving, feel good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Salient(saving, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.56
Typical(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(saving, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Typical(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(saving, feel good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(saving, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(saving, feel good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.31
Salient(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(saving, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(saving, feel good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.31
Salient(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(saving, feel good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.31
Salient(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(saving, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(talking, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(giving, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(talking, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(giving, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(saving, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(giving, feel good)