username: have unique

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents name
Weight: 0.62
, thing
Weight: 0.60
, web site
Weight: 0.58
, information
Weight: 0.55
Siblings domain name
Weight: 0.36
, web browser
Weight: 0.34
, login
Weight: 0.33
, web
Weight: 0.33
, twitter
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
have unique 1.00
is unique 0.97

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(twitter, is unique)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Remarkable(domain name, have unique)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
Remarkable(domain name, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(domain name, have unique)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(twitter, is unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(twitter, is unique)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Salient(username, have unique)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(username, is unique)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.66
Salient(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(username, is unique)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(username, is unique)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.31
Typical(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(username, is unique)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.66
Salient(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(username, have unique)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.45
Plausible(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(username, have unique)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(domain name, have unique)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 0.97
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(username, have unique) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(twitter, is unique)