spending: has quality bad

Related concepts

Parents	activity Weight: 0.66 , bill Weight: 0.58 , behavior Weight: 0.58 , policy Weight: 0.57 , factor Weight: 0.57
Siblings	business activity Weight: 0.35 , sexual activity Weight: 0.34 , dollar bill Weight: 0.33 , consumption Weight: 0.33 , appropriation Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality bad	1.00
has quality worth	0.82
feel good	0.76
is good thing	0.75

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.56

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(behavior, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(spending, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Plausible(behavior, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.42

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Remarkable(behavior, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(behavior, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Plausible(spending, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

Remarkable(business activity, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Plausible(business activity, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Salient(spending, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Typical(spending, has quality worth)

0.56

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Plausible(spending, has quality worth)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.33

¬ Typical(spending, is good thing)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Typical(spending, feel good)

0.51

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Plausible(spending, feel good)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.75

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Plausible(spending, is good thing)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.57

Salient(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Salient(spending, has quality worth)

0.48

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

Evidence: 0.57

Salient(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.59

¬ Salient(spending, feel good)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.75

Evidence: 0.57

Salient(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.68

¬ Salient(spending, is good thing)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.56

Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Remarkable(spending, feel good)

0.42

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.56

Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Remarkable(spending, has quality worth)

0.40

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.75

Evidence: 0.56

Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.87

¬ Remarkable(spending, is good thing)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Salient(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(spending, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.52

Plausible(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(spending, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Typical(behavior, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Remarkable(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.79

¬ Typical(business activity, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.31

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(spending, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Typical(behavior, has quality bad)