strategy: fail rivkin

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents method
Weight: 0.67
, objective
Weight: 0.65
, plan
Weight: 0.65
, policy
Weight: 0.60
Siblings approach
Weight: 0.70
, planning
Weight: 0.69
, framework
Weight: 0.68
, marketing
Weight: 0.65
, consolidation
Weight: 0.65

Related properties

Property Similarity
fail hbr 1.00
fail 1.00
fail rivkin 1.00
fails 0.85

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

0.62
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(plan, fail) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(strategy, fail rivkin)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(policy, fail) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(strategy, fail rivkin)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(plan, fails) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(strategy, fail rivkin)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(policy, fail)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(plan, fails)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(plan, fail)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.58
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(plan, fail)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(policy, fail)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(plan, fails)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(marketing, fail)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(plan, fail) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(policy, fail) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.04
Plausible(plan, fails) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(marketing, fail) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(marketing, fail)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Salient(strategy, fail rivkin)

Similarity expansion

0.84
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(strategy, fail)
0.84
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail)
0.84
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Salient(strategy, fail)
0.83
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(strategy, fail hbr)
0.83
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Salient(strategy, fail hbr)
0.83
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail hbr)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(strategy, fail)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(strategy, fail hbr)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(strategy, fails)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Salient(strategy, fails)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fails)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(strategy, fails)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Salient(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(strategy, fail rivkin)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.51
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(policy, fail)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(plan, fail)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(plan, fails)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Remarkable(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Typical(marketing, fail)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(policy, fail)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(plan, fails)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.20
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(strategy, fail rivkin) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(plan, fail)