software: needs quality product

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents software company
Weight: 0.74
, computer program
Weight: 0.70
, module
Weight: 0.67
, code
Weight: 0.65
Siblings browser
Weight: 0.75
, computer game
Weight: 0.75
, free software
Weight: 0.74
, freeware
Weight: 0.70
, source code
Weight: 0.69

Related properties

Property Similarity
needs quality product 1.00
is quality product 0.92
is product 0.87
has quality system 0.80
has quality good 0.80
have needed requirements 0.79
has quality bad 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

0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(computer program, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(software company, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(computer program, is product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(code, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(software company, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(computer program, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(code, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(code, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality system)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(computer program, is product)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(software company, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(code, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(software company, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(code, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(software company, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(software company, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(code, has quality good)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality system)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(computer program, is product)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Remarkable(source code, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(computer game, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(computer game, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(source code, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(freeware, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(computer program, is product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(computer program, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(software company, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(code, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(computer program, has quality system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(software company, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(code, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(software, needs quality product)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(freeware, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(freeware, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(source code, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(source code, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(computer game, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(computer game, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
Remarkable(source code, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(source code, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(computer game, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(computer game, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(software, needs quality product)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(software, is quality product)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Typical(software, have needed requirements)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(software, is quality product)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(software, have needed requirements)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(software, have needed requirements)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.81
Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(software, have needed requirements)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(software, is quality product)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(software, is quality product)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Salient(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(software, needs quality product)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(computer program, is product)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality system)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(code, has quality bad)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(code, has quality good)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(software company, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(software company, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.24
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(source code, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(freeware, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(source code, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(computer game, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(computer game, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Typical(computer program, is product)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality system)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(code, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(code, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(software company, has quality bad)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(software company, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(software, needs quality product) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)