tonga: is poor

Related concepts

Parents	island Weight: 0.55 , place Weight: 0.55 , country Weight: 0.50 , new zealand Weight: 0.47 , part Weight: 0.46
Siblings	bus stop Weight: 0.32 , kolkata Weight: 0.31 , hostel Weight: 0.31 , hyderabad Weight: 0.31 , malta Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property	Similarity
is poor	1.00
has quality bad	0.78

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.57

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.85

Plausible(country, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(tonga, is poor)

0.37

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(country, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(tonga, is poor)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.85

¬ Plausible(country, is poor)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Plausible(country, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.36

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Remarkable(country, is poor)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.41

¬ Remarkable(country, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Remarkable(kolkata, is poor)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

¬ Remarkable(hyderabad, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.85

Plausible(country, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Plausible(tonga, is poor)

0.29

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.69

Plausible(country, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Plausible(tonga, is poor)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

Remarkable(kolkata, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.52

¬ Plausible(kolkata, is poor)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

Remarkable(hyderabad, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.49

¬ Plausible(hyderabad, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Salient(tonga, is poor)

Similarity expansion

0.60

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.89

Typical(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(tonga, has quality bad)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.88

Salient(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Salient(tonga, has quality bad)

0.57

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Plausible(tonga, has quality bad)

0.48

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.55

Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.63

¬ Remarkable(tonga, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.88

Salient(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.83

Plausible(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Typical(tonga, is poor)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.25

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Typical(country, is poor)

0.20

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(country, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Typical(kolkata, is poor)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.55

¬ Remarkable(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.65

¬ Typical(hyderabad, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.89

Typical(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Typical(country, is poor)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78

Evidence: 0.89

Typical(tonga, is poor) ⋁

Evidence: 0.88

¬ Typical(country, has quality bad)