tennis: has state love

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
has state love 1.00
be called love 0.86
say love 0.85
use word love 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(tennis player, say love)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(tennis player, say love)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(tennis player, say love)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Salient(tennis, has state love)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(tennis, say love)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(tennis, be called love)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(tennis, say love)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Salient(tennis, say love)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Salient(tennis, be called love)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(tennis, be called love)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(tennis, be called love)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(tennis, say love)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.73
Typical(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(tennis, use word love)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Plausible(tennis, use word love)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(tennis, use word love)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(tennis, use word love)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(tennis, has state love)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
Plausible(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(tennis, has state love)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(tennis, has state love)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(tennis player, say love)