strut: go bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents part
Weight: 0.52
, framework
Weight: 0.52
, technology
Weight: 0.51
, device
Weight: 0.50
Siblings turn
Weight: 0.30
, strap
Weight: 0.30
, rubber band
Weight: 0.30
, roll
Weight: 0.29
, hood
Weight: 0.29

Related properties

Property Similarity
go bad 1.00
has quality bad 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

0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(framework, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(strut, go bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(technology, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(strut, go bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(technology, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(framework, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(framework, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(rubber band, go bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(framework, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(strut, go bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(technology, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(strut, go bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(rubber band, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(rubber band, go bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(strut, go bad)

Similarity expansion

0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.20
Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(strut, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(strut, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(strut, has quality bad)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(strut, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(strut, go bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(framework, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(rubber band, go bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(strut, go bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(framework, has quality bad)