support: be important in system

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents consideration
Weight: 0.60
, message
Weight: 0.58
, medium
Weight: 0.57
, extension
Weight: 0.57
, element
Weight: 0.57
Siblings strength
Weight: 0.32
, contribution
Weight: 0.32
, attention
Weight: 0.31
, vote
Weight: 0.31
, motivation
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be important in system 1.00
be important in skeletal system 0.79
be important in team 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(contribution, be important in team)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(contribution, be important in team) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(contribution, be important in team)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(support, be important in system)

Similarity expansion

0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(support, be important in skeletal system)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Salient(support, be important in skeletal system)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(support, be important in team)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(support, be important in skeletal system)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(support, be important in skeletal system)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(support, be important in team)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(support, be important in team)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Salient(support, be important in team)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
Salient(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(support, be important in system)

Typical implies Plausible

0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
Plausible(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(support, be important in system)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(support, be important in system) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(contribution, be important in team)