sega: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents company
Weight: 0.55
, publisher
Weight: 0.49
, client
Weight: 0.49
, system
Weight: 0.47
, sony
Weight: 0.46
Siblings nintendo
Weight: 0.33
, toshiba
Weight: 0.33
, mitsubishi
Weight: 0.32
, motorola
Weight: 0.32
, philips
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality system 0.82
has quality worth 0.82
make bad games 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

0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(client, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(sega, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(system, has quality system)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(sega, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(client, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(system, has quality system)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(client, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(system, has quality system)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(toshiba, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(mitsubishi, has quality worth)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(philips, has quality worth)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(client, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(system, has quality system)
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(sega, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(toshiba, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(toshiba, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.93
Remarkable(philips, has quality worth)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(philips, has quality worth)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(mitsubishi, has quality worth)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(mitsubishi, has quality worth)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(sega, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(sega, has quality system)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(sega, has quality worth)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Salient(sega, make bad games)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(sega, make bad games)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(sega, make bad games)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(sega, make bad games)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(sega, has quality system)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(sega, has quality worth)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(sega, has quality system)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(sega, has quality worth)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality worth)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality system)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(sega, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(client, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(system, has quality system)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(toshiba, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(philips, has quality worth)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(mitsubishi, has quality worth)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(client, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(sega, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(system, has quality system)