supplier: be on pass

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents vendor
Weight: 0.61
, competitor
Weight: 0.60
, contractor
Weight: 0.60
, third party
Weight: 0.60
, warranty
Weight: 0.58
Siblings macromedia
Weight: 0.42
, distributor
Weight: 0.35
, software company
Weight: 0.34
, seller
Weight: 0.33
, shipper
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be on pass 1.00
be on boarding pass 0.81
get on dhl 0.76

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

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(vendor, get on dhl) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(supplier, be on pass)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(vendor, get on dhl)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(vendor, get on dhl)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(vendor, get on dhl) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(supplier, be on pass)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(supplier, be on pass)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(supplier, be on boarding pass)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Salient(supplier, be on boarding pass)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Plausible(supplier, be on boarding pass)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.32
Typical(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(supplier, be on boarding pass)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Salient(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(supplier, be on pass)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(supplier, be on pass)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(vendor, get on dhl)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.32
Typical(supplier, be on pass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(vendor, get on dhl)