unit: be important in working word problem

Related concepts

Parents	area Weight: 0.63 , facility Weight: 0.63 , market Weight: 0.61 , office Weight: 0.60
Siblings	central processing unit Weight: 0.79 , battalion Weight: 0.72 , division Weight: 0.69 , processor Weight: 0.66 , department Weight: 0.64

Related properties

Property	Similarity
be important in working word problem	1.00
be important in word problem	0.95
working with three-dimensional figure	0.77
need work together	0.77
is good now	0.77
need one	0.77
time bad idea	0.76

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.19

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.30

Plausible(office, need one) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Typical(unit, be important in working word problem)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.30

¬ Plausible(office, need one)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.24

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

¬ Remarkable(office, need one)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.07

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.65

¬ Remarkable(division, is good now)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

¬ Remarkable(department, need work together)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.22

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.30

Plausible(office, need one) ⋁

Evidence: 0.46

Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.89

Remarkable(department, need work together) ⋁

Evidence: 0.47

¬ Plausible(department, need work together)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.65

Remarkable(division, is good now) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Plausible(division, is good now)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24

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

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Salient(unit, be important in working word problem)

Similarity expansion

0.75

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.90

Typical(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Typical(unit, be important in word problem)

0.71

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.83

Salient(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Salient(unit, be important in word problem)

0.70

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Plausible(unit, be important in word problem)

0.62

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.95

Evidence: 0.46

Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.43

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in word problem)

0.60

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.90

Typical(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.96

¬ Typical(unit, working with three-dimensional figure)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.91

¬ Plausible(unit, working with three-dimensional figure)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.83

Salient(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.96

¬ Salient(unit, working with three-dimensional figure)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.62

¬ Remarkable(unit, working with three-dimensional figure)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.83

Salient(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Typical(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.82

Plausible(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Typical(unit, be important in working word problem)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.38

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.07

¬ Typical(office, need one)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.32

¬ Typical(department, need work together)

0.07

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Remarkable(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.76

¬ Typical(division, is good now)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.90

Typical(unit, be important in working word problem) ⋁

Evidence: 0.07

¬ Typical(office, need one)