telephone: were needed

Related concepts

Parents	cellular telephone Weight: 0.76 , telephone system Weight: 0.66 , device Weight: 0.61 , network Weight: 0.61 , utility Weight: 0.60
Siblings	mobile phone Weight: 0.38 , cellphone Weight: 0.35 , computer network Weight: 0.34 , pager Weight: 0.33 , internet service provider Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property	Similarity
were needed	1.00
is needed	0.93
were really needed	0.92
need anologue	0.83
be needed changed over time	0.81
be needed changed	0.81
were made	0.79
be like chromecast necessary	0.79
were useful in past	0.76
is required	0.76

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.51

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.29

Plausible(network, is needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Typical(telephone, were needed)

0.46

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.45

Plausible(device, be like chromecast necessary) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Typical(telephone, were needed)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Plausible(network, is needed)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.45

¬ Plausible(device, be like chromecast necessary)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.12

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Remarkable(device, be like chromecast necessary)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.12
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

¬ Remarkable(network, is needed)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Remarkable(cellphone, were made)

0.04

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.92

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Remarkable(cellphone, were really needed)

0.03

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Remarkable(mobile phone, be needed changed over time)

0.02

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.13
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.95

¬ Remarkable(cellphone, were needed)

0.01

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.12
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

¬ Remarkable(computer network, is needed)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.29

Plausible(network, is needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.42

¬ Plausible(telephone, were needed)

0.33

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.45

Plausible(device, be like chromecast necessary) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.42

¬ Plausible(telephone, were needed)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.60

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.95

Remarkable(cellphone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.32

¬ Plausible(cellphone, were needed)

0.56

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

Remarkable(computer network, is needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.27

¬ Plausible(computer network, is needed)

0.51

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.92

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

Remarkable(cellphone, were really needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Plausible(cellphone, were really needed)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

Remarkable(mobile phone, be needed changed over time) ⋁

Evidence: 0.73

¬ Plausible(mobile phone, be needed changed over time)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

Remarkable(cellphone, were made) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Plausible(cellphone, were made)

Salient implies Plausible

0.17

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.66

¬ Salient(telephone, were needed)

Similarity expansion

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.91

Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were useful in past)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.66

Salient(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Salient(telephone, were useful in past)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Plausible(telephone, were useful in past)

0.23

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.76

Evidence: 0.24

Typical(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Typical(telephone, were useful in past)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.66

Salient(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Typical(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Typical(telephone, were needed)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.44

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.07

¬ Typical(network, is needed)

0.27

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.36

¬ Typical(device, be like chromecast necessary)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Typical(cellphone, were needed)

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.06

¬ Typical(computer network, is needed)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.92

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.51

¬ Typical(cellphone, were really needed)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Typical(cellphone, were made)

0.04

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.81

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Remarkable(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Typical(mobile phone, be needed changed over time)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.93

Evidence: 0.24

Typical(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.07

¬ Typical(network, is needed)

0.28

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.24

Typical(telephone, were needed) ⋁

Evidence: 0.36

¬ Typical(device, be like chromecast necessary)