table: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents hash table
Weight: 0.76
, dining room
Weight: 0.65
, screen
Weight: 0.62
, sign
Weight: 0.62
Siblings picnic table
Weight: 0.81
, dining table
Weight: 0.74
, coffee table
Weight: 0.72
, table saw
Weight: 0.64
, sofa
Weight: 0.61

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
has quality worth 0.85
has shape solid 0.79
be better than real life 0.76
has quality print 0.75

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

0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(screen, has quality print) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(table, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(hash table, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(table, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(hash table, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(screen, has quality print)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(hash table, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(screen, has quality print)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(sofa, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(sofa, has quality worth)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
Plausible(hash table, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(table, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(screen, has quality print) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(table, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(sofa, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Plausible(sofa, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(sofa, has quality worth) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(sofa, has quality worth)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(table, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(table, has quality bad)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality bad)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(table, has quality bad)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(table, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(table, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(hash table, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(screen, has quality print)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(sofa, has quality worth)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(sofa, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(hash table, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.82
Typical(table, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(screen, has quality print)