technician: be do repair

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents nurse
Weight: 0.67
, person
Weight: 0.61
, job
Weight: 0.61
, employee
Weight: 0.60
Siblings engineer
Weight: 0.35
, office worker
Weight: 0.35
, salesman
Weight: 0.35
, receptionist
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be do repair 1.00
be at repair shop 0.91
fix computer 0.80
fix break computer 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

Salient implies Plausible

0.13
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(technician, be do repair)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(technician, be at repair shop)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(technician, fix break computer)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(technician, fix computer)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(technician, be at repair shop)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(technician, be at repair shop)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(technician, be at repair shop)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Salient(technician, fix break computer)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(technician, fix break computer)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(technician, fix computer)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(technician, fix computer)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(technician, fix computer)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(technician, fix break computer)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Salient(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(technician, be do repair)

Typical implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(technician, be do repair) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(technician, be do repair)