triangulation: be excellent way building

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents method
Weight: 0.64
, strategy
Weight: 0.58
, thing
Weight: 0.57
, algorithm
Weight: 0.54
, technology
Weight: 0.54
Siblings intuition
Weight: 0.32
, waterboarding
Weight: 0.32
, approach
Weight: 0.32
, fiber optics
Weight: 0.31
, point system
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
be excellent way building 1.00
has quality good 0.80
be used building 0.78

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

0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(strategy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(technology, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(technology, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(strategy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(strategy, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Plausible(strategy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(technology, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(triangulation, be excellent way building)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(triangulation, be used building)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(triangulation, be used building)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(triangulation, has quality good)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(triangulation, be used building)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(triangulation, has quality good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, be used building)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(triangulation, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Salient(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(strategy, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(strategy, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(triangulation, be excellent way building) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)