stalk: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.48
, inch
Weight: 0.44
, residue
Weight: 0.41
, part
Weight: 0.41
, debris
Weight: 0.40
Siblings brussels sprout
Weight: 0.31
, caterpillar
Weight: 0.30
, hate
Weight: 0.30
, banana peel
Weight: 0.30
, weed
Weight: 0.30

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality uses 0.78

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(weed, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(banana peel, has quality uses)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(weed, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(weed, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(banana peel, has quality uses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(banana peel, has quality uses)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(stalk, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.91
Salient(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Salient(stalk, has quality uses)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.75
Typical(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(stalk, has quality uses)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(stalk, has quality uses)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.78
Remarkable(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(stalk, has quality uses)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Salient(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(stalk, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(stalk, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(weed, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(stalk, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(banana peel, has quality uses)