tennis player: service to her opponent

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents athlete
Weight: 0.78
, player
Weight: 0.69
, thing
Weight: 0.63
, sport
Weight: 0.62
Siblings football player
Weight: 0.42
, hockey player
Weight: 0.42
, soccer player
Weight: 0.41
, baseball player
Weight: 0.40
, basketball player
Weight: 0.39

Related properties

Property Similarity
service to her opponent 1.00
serve to his opponent 0.89
best opponent 0.84
guard opponent 0.83
shoulder opponent 0.80

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

0.14
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(player, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(tennis player, service to her opponent)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(player, best opponent)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(player, best opponent)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(basketball player, guard opponent)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(hockey player, shoulder opponent)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(player, best opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(hockey player, shoulder opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(hockey player, shoulder opponent)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(basketball player, guard opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(basketball player, guard opponent)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Salient(tennis player, service to her opponent)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(tennis player, serve to his opponent)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(tennis player, serve to his opponent)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, serve to his opponent)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.35
Salient(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Salient(tennis player, serve to his opponent)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.35
Salient(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent)

Typical implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Plausible(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(tennis player, service to her opponent)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(player, best opponent)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Typical(basketball player, guard opponent)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(hockey player, shoulder opponent)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.77
Typical(tennis player, service to her opponent) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(player, best opponent)