trainer: be good for sport

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents expert
Weight: 0.63
, person
Weight: 0.59
, professional
Weight: 0.58
, fitness
Weight: 0.56
Siblings instructor
Weight: 0.34
, psychologist
Weight: 0.34
, veterinarian
Weight: 0.33
, counselor
Weight: 0.32
, lawyer
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
be good for sport 1.00
be good for outdoor sport 0.89
has quality good 0.76

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

0.37
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(fitness, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(trainer, be good for sport)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(fitness, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.13
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(fitness, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(lawyer, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(veterinarian, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(fitness, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(trainer, be good for sport)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
Remarkable(veterinarian, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(veterinarian, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(lawyer, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(lawyer, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(trainer, be good for sport)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Salient(trainer, be good for outdoor sport)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for outdoor sport)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(trainer, be good for outdoor sport)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(trainer, be good for outdoor sport)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(trainer, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(trainer, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(trainer, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(trainer, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(trainer, be good for sport)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(fitness, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(veterinarian, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(lawyer, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(trainer, be good for sport) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(fitness, has quality good)