skyscraper: be sign of urban improvement

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents structure
Weight: 0.67
, office building
Weight: 0.61
, monument
Weight: 0.50
, architecture
Weight: 0.49
, landmark
Weight: 0.47
Siblings space needle
Weight: 0.56
, eiffel tower
Weight: 0.37
, tower
Weight: 0.36
, clock tower
Weight: 0.35
, empire state building
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be sign of urban improvement 1.00
be sign of improvement 0.94
have signs 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

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(office building, have signs) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(office building, have signs)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.24
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(office building, have signs)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(office building, have signs) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Plausible(skyscraper, be sign of improvement)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(skyscraper, be sign of improvement)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(skyscraper, be sign of improvement)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(skyscraper, be sign of improvement)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Salient(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement)

Typical implies Plausible

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(office building, have signs)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.54
Typical(skyscraper, be sign of urban improvement) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(office building, have signs)