service: is quality

Related concepts

Parents	escort service Weight: 0.87 , postal service Weight: 0.82 , honor Weight: 0.62 , delivery Weight: 0.58
Siblings	service station Weight: 0.85 , internet service provider Weight: 0.83 , bar service Weight: 0.72 , public transport Weight: 0.71 , health insurance Weight: 0.68

Related properties

Property	Similarity
is quality	1.00
has quality good	0.91
has quality better	0.89
has quality bad	0.87
has quality right	0.87
has quality worth	0.83

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.50

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.75

Plausible(delivery, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Typical(service, is quality)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.50

Plausible(delivery, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Typical(service, is quality)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Plausible(delivery, has quality worth)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Plausible(delivery, has quality better)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.18

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Remarkable(delivery, has quality better)

0.12

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Remarkable(delivery, has quality worth)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Remarkable(health insurance, has quality bad)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

¬ Remarkable(public transport, has quality bad)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(health insurance, has quality right)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Remarkable(public transport, has quality good)

0.04

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(health insurance, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.36

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.75

Plausible(delivery, has quality better) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.68

¬ Plausible(service, is quality)

0.33

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.50

Plausible(delivery, has quality worth) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.68

¬ Plausible(service, is quality)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.51

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

Remarkable(health insurance, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Plausible(health insurance, has quality bad)

0.51

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

Remarkable(health insurance, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.85

¬ Plausible(health insurance, has quality good)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

Remarkable(public transport, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Plausible(public transport, has quality good)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

Remarkable(health insurance, has quality right) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Plausible(health insurance, has quality right)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

Remarkable(public transport, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.60

¬ Plausible(public transport, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.86

¬ Salient(service, is quality)

Similarity expansion

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.84

Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Remarkable(service, has quality good)

0.67

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.86

Salient(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Salient(service, has quality good)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(service, has quality good)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.63

Typical(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Typical(service, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.86

Salient(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Typical(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.68

Plausible(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Typical(service, is quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.30

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Typical(delivery, has quality worth)

0.17

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(delivery, has quality better)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Typical(health insurance, has quality bad)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.64

¬ Typical(health insurance, has quality right)

0.04

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.87

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Typical(public transport, has quality bad)

0.03

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.86

¬ Typical(health insurance, has quality good)

0.03

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.91

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Remarkable(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Typical(public transport, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.83

Evidence: 0.63

Typical(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Typical(delivery, has quality worth)

0.31

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.89

Evidence: 0.63

Typical(service, is quality) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(delivery, has quality better)