south africa: is more developed

Related concepts

Parents	south korea Weight: 0.81 , africa Weight: 0.80 , south america Weight: 0.78 , latin america Weight: 0.73
Siblings	new zealand Weight: 0.69 , australia Weight: 0.66 , germany Weight: 0.65 , france Weight: 0.64 , south Weight: 0.63

Related properties

Property	Similarity
is more developed	1.00
is less developed	0.97
is developed	0.95
be regarded as developing country	0.76

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.47

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(latin america, is developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Typical(south africa, is more developed)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.67

Plausible(south america, is developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Typical(south africa, is more developed)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.49

Plausible(latin america, is less developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Typical(south africa, is more developed)

0.32

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.37

Plausible(south america, is less developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Typical(south africa, is more developed)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.37

¬ Plausible(south america, is less developed)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Plausible(latin america, is less developed)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Plausible(south america, is developed)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Plausible(latin america, is developed)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.30

¬ Remarkable(south america, is less developed)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.38

¬ Remarkable(latin america, is less developed)

0.42

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(south america, is developed)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(latin america, is developed)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

¬ Remarkable(france, is developed)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Remarkable(australia, is developed)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(latin america, is developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.66

¬ Plausible(south africa, is more developed)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.67

Plausible(south america, is developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.66

¬ Plausible(south africa, is more developed)

0.32

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.49

Plausible(latin america, is less developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.66

¬ Plausible(south africa, is more developed)

0.30

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.37

Plausible(south america, is less developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.66

¬ Plausible(south africa, is more developed)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.55

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

Remarkable(australia, is developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Plausible(australia, is developed)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.75

Remarkable(france, is developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.64

¬ Plausible(france, is developed)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.65

¬ Salient(south africa, is more developed)

Similarity expansion

0.76

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Salient(south africa, is less developed)

0.75

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.26

¬ Plausible(south africa, is less developed)

0.75

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Typical(south africa, is less developed)

0.72

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.21

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is less developed)

0.70

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Typical(south africa, is developed)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Plausible(south africa, is developed)

0.62

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Salient(south africa, is developed)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is developed)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Typical(south africa, be regarded as developing country)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.76

¬ Plausible(south africa, be regarded as developing country)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Salient(south africa, be regarded as developing country)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.40

Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Remarkable(south africa, be regarded as developing country)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.65

Salient(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.66

Plausible(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Typical(south africa, is more developed)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Typical(south america, is less developed)

0.37

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Typical(latin america, is less developed)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Typical(latin america, is developed)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(south america, is developed)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Typical(france, is developed)

0.09

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.40

¬ Remarkable(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Typical(australia, is developed)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.42

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Typical(south america, is less developed)

0.41

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Typical(latin america, is less developed)

0.40

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Typical(latin america, is developed)

0.39

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.80

Typical(south africa, is more developed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Typical(south america, is developed)