stop: have effect

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents place
Weight: 0.60
, sign
Weight: 0.59
, practice
Weight: 0.59
, issue
Weight: 0.57
, policy
Weight: 0.56
Siblings stop sign
Weight: 0.71
, bus stop
Weight: 0.36
, street sign
Weight: 0.33
, stopping
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
have effect 1.00
impact use 0.82
have multiplier effect 0.81
impact use of energy 0.79
effect customer 0.79

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

0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(issue, impact use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(stop, have effect)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(policy, have multiplier effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(stop, have effect)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(policy, effect customer) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(stop, have effect)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(issue, impact use of energy) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(stop, have effect)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(issue, impact use)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(issue, impact use of energy)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(policy, have multiplier effect)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(policy, effect customer)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.14
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(issue, impact use of energy)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.20
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(policy, effect customer)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.17
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Remarkable(policy, have multiplier effect)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.14
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Remarkable(issue, impact use)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.39
Plausible(policy, have multiplier effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(stop, have effect)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(issue, impact use) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(stop, have effect)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(policy, effect customer) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(stop, have effect)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(issue, impact use of energy) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(stop, have effect)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Salient(stop, have effect)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
Salient(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Typical(stop, have effect)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(issue, impact use)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(policy, have multiplier effect)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(issue, impact use of energy)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(policy, effect customer)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Typical(issue, impact use)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(policy, have multiplier effect)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(issue, impact use of energy)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.06
Typical(stop, have effect) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(policy, effect customer)