television program: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents program
Weight: 0.74
, television
Weight: 0.70
, broadcast
Weight: 0.67
, channel
Weight: 0.66
Siblings talk show
Weight: 0.72
, football game
Weight: 0.67
, game show
Weight: 0.64
, soap opera
Weight: 0.64
, twilight zone
Weight: 0.63

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
is quality 0.87
improve quality 0.81
improve quality of life 0.80
has quality news 0.80
is good now 0.79
look bad 0.79
is terrible 0.77

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

0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(television, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(television, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(channel, has quality news) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(program, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(television, improve quality of life) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(program, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(television, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(television, improve quality of life)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(program, is quality)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(television, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(channel, has quality news)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.51
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(television, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(program, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(television, improve quality of life)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(television, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(program, is quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(channel, has quality news)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Remarkable(talk show, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(football game, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Remarkable(soap opera, look bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(soap opera, is terrible)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(television, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(television program, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(television, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(television program, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(television program, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(program, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(television program, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(channel, has quality news) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(television program, has quality bad)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(television, improve quality of life) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(television program, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
Remarkable(talk show, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(talk show, has quality bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(football game, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(football game, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
Remarkable(soap opera, look bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(soap opera, look bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(soap opera, is terrible) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(soap opera, is terrible)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(television program, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(television program, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(program, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(program, is quality)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(television, improve quality of life)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(channel, has quality news)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(talk show, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(football game, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(soap opera, look bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(soap opera, is terrible)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(program, has quality bad)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(television, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(program, is quality)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(television, improve quality of life)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(television program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(channel, has quality news)