twitter: be good for marketing

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents web site
Weight: 0.72
, web page
Weight: 0.64
, forum
Weight: 0.64
, website
Weight: 0.63
, topic
Weight: 0.63
Siblings blog
Weight: 0.37
, web
Weight: 0.37
, wikipedia
Weight: 0.36
, web browser
Weight: 0.35
, google
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
be good for marketing 1.00
be important for marketing 0.97
be good for advertising 0.85
be good for business 0.82
be important for business 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

0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(website, be important for business)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(website, be good for business)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(website, be good for business)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(website, be important for business)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.16
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(website, be important for business)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.31
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(website, be good for business)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(blog, be good for marketing)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(blog, be important for business)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(blog, be good for business)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(website, be good for business)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(website, be important for business)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(blog, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(blog, be good for marketing)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(blog, be good for business)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(blog, be good for business)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(blog, be important for business)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(blog, be important for business)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Salient(twitter, be good for marketing)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(twitter, be important for marketing)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be important for marketing)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(twitter, be important for marketing)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(twitter, be important for marketing)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Salient(twitter, be good for business)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(twitter, be important for business)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for business)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(twitter, be good for business)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be important for business)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(twitter, be good for business)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(twitter, be important for business)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(twitter, be important for business)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Salient(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(website, be good for business)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(website, be important for business)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(blog, be good for marketing)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Typical(blog, be good for business)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.29
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(blog, be important for business)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(website, be good for business)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.79
Typical(twitter, be good for marketing)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(website, be important for business)