tennis: be how played

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents water sport
Weight: 0.64
, sport
Weight: 0.63
, hobby
Weight: 0.62
, swimming pool
Weight: 0.62
, ball
Weight: 0.60
Siblings table tennis
Weight: 0.75
, tennis ball
Weight: 0.39
, tennis racket
Weight: 0.38
, tennis court
Weight: 0.37
, tennis player
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
be how played 1.00
be played 0.88
is played 0.87
was played 0.86
is play 0.82
was played long ago 0.80
be played on different surfaces 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

0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(sport, is play) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(tennis, be how played)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(sport, is play)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.10
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Remarkable(sport, is play)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(table tennis, be played)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(sport, is play) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(tennis, be how played)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(table tennis, be played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(table tennis, be played)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(tennis, be how played)

Similarity expansion

0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(tennis, is played)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(tennis, is played)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(tennis, was played long ago)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Salient(tennis, is played)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be played)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Typical(tennis, be played)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(tennis, be played)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(tennis, was played long ago)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(tennis, was played)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(tennis, be played)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(tennis, is played)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(tennis, is play)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(tennis, was played)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(tennis, was played)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(tennis, was played)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(tennis, is play)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(tennis, is play)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(tennis, is play)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(tennis, was played long ago)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(tennis, was played long ago)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Salient(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be how played)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(tennis, be how played)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(sport, is play)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(table tennis, be played)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.51
Typical(tennis, be how played) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(sport, is play)