scaling: be in pca

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents operation
Weight: 0.59
, function
Weight: 0.58
, process
Weight: 0.57
, feature
Weight: 0.56
Siblings shrinking
Weight: 0.39
, cutting
Weight: 0.33
, setting
Weight: 0.32
, trimming
Weight: 0.32
, trigonometric function
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be in pca 1.00
is in 0.89
be time-consuming 0.88
be on f2p 0.81
be important in c++ 0.78
be in play 0.77
have one y-intercept 0.77
have asymptotes 0.77
be for people 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

0.43
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(function, be important in c++) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(scaling, be in pca)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(function, have asymptotes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(scaling, be in pca)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(process, be time-consuming) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(scaling, be in pca)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(function, have one y-intercept) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(scaling, be in pca)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(process, be time-consuming)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(function, have one y-intercept)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(function, have asymptotes)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(function, be important in c++)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(process, be time-consuming)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(function, be important in c++)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(function, have one y-intercept)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(function, have asymptotes)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(setting, be in play)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(cutting, is in)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.38
Plausible(process, be time-consuming) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(scaling, be in pca)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.74
Plausible(function, be important in c++) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(scaling, be in pca)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(function, have asymptotes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(scaling, be in pca)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.34
Plausible(function, have one y-intercept) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(scaling, be in pca)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
Remarkable(cutting, is in) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(cutting, is in)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(setting, be in play) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(setting, be in play)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(scaling, be in pca)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca)

Typical implies Plausible

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(scaling, be in pca)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Typical(process, be time-consuming)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(function, have one y-intercept)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(function, have asymptotes)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(function, be important in c++)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(cutting, is in)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(setting, be in play)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Typical(process, be time-consuming)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(function, have one y-intercept)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(function, have asymptotes)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(scaling, be in pca) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(function, be important in c++)