sector: compete for services

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents segment
Weight: 0.62
, issue
Weight: 0.55
, factor
Weight: 0.54
, unit
Weight: 0.54
Siblings automobile industry
Weight: 0.76
, financial institution
Weight: 0.72
, oil company
Weight: 0.72
, public transport
Weight: 0.71
, industry
Weight: 0.70

Related properties

Property Similarity
compete for services 1.00
compete for goods 0.87
be in competitive 0.77

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

0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(issue, be in competitive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(sector, compete for services)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Plausible(issue, be in competitive)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(issue, be in competitive)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(issue, be in competitive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(sector, compete for services)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(sector, compete for services)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(sector, compete for goods)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(sector, compete for goods)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(sector, compete for goods)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.41
Remarkable(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(sector, compete for goods)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(sector, compete for services)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(sector, compete for services)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(issue, be in competitive)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(sector, compete for services) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(issue, be in competitive)