smart card: be seen as privacy technologies

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents credit card
Weight: 0.81
, electronic device
Weight: 0.72
, card
Weight: 0.71
, debit card
Weight: 0.69
Siblings sim
Weight: 0.53
, business card
Weight: 0.43
, sound card
Weight: 0.42
, wild card
Weight: 0.42
, green card
Weight: 0.42

Related properties

Property Similarity
be seen as privacy technologies 1.00
be seen as privacy invasive technologies 0.95

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

0.62
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Plausible(card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies)

Similarity expansion

0.81
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.96
Remarkable(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(smart card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(smart card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.48
Salient(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(smart card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.03
Typical(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(smart card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Salient(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.03
Typical(smart card, be seen as privacy technologies) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(card, be seen as privacy invasive technologies)