security guard: have badges

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents security system
Weight: 0.77
, employee
Weight: 0.69
, police officer
Weight: 0.68
, worker
Weight: 0.68
Siblings bouncer
Weight: 0.47
, prison guard
Weight: 0.37
, state police
Weight: 0.35
, police
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
have badges 1.00
wear badges 0.97
wear uniforms 0.75

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

0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(police officer, wear uniforms)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(security guard, have badges)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(employee, wear uniforms)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(security guard, have badges)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(employee, wear uniforms)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(police officer, wear uniforms)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(employee, wear uniforms)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(police officer, wear uniforms)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(police, wear uniforms)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(police officer, wear uniforms)
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(security guard, have badges)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.76
Plausible(employee, wear uniforms)
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Plausible(security guard, have badges)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(police, wear uniforms)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(police, wear uniforms)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(security guard, have badges)

Similarity expansion

0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(security guard, wear badges)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(security guard, wear badges)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(security guard, wear badges)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(security guard, wear uniforms)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(security guard, wear uniforms)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(security guard, wear badges)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(security guard, wear uniforms)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(security guard, wear uniforms)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.52
Plausible(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(security guard, have badges)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.13
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(employee, wear uniforms)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(police officer, wear uniforms)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(police, wear uniforms)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(employee, wear uniforms)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.42
Typical(security guard, have badges)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(police officer, wear uniforms)