tank: were good during ww1

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents part
Weight: 0.58
, equipment
Weight: 0.58
, weapon
Weight: 0.57
, item
Weight: 0.57
, hardware
Weight: 0.57
Siblings gas tank
Weight: 0.63
, riser
Weight: 0.42
, tank top
Weight: 0.36
, rocket launcher
Weight: 0.32
, diesel engine
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
were good during ww1 1.00
were used in good way 0.86
were important in 1918 0.86
were used in way 0.81
were useful in ww1 0.79
were more useful on front 0.78
were useful 0.77
were helpful 0.76
were more useful on western front 0.76
were effective in ww1 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

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(tank, were good during ww1)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(tank, were important in 1918)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(tank, were important in 1918)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(tank, were important in 1918)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(tank, were useful in ww1)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(tank, were useful in ww1)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(tank, were useful)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(tank, were useful)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(tank, were helpful)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(tank, were more useful on western front)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(tank, were useful in ww1)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(tank, were helpful)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(tank, were effective in ww1)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(tank, were important in 1918)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(tank, were more useful on western front)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.87
Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(tank, were effective in ww1)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(tank, were useful)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(tank, were helpful)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(tank, were more useful on western front)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(tank, were effective in ww1)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(tank, were useful in ww1)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(tank, were more useful on western front)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(tank, were effective in ww1)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(tank, were helpful)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(tank, were useful)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(tank, were good during ww1)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.83
Plausible(tank, were good during ww1) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(tank, were good during ww1)