utility: be vs ordinal utility

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents operating expense
Weight: 0.61
, service
Weight: 0.61
, water
Weight: 0.59
Siblings power line
Weight: 0.70
, electricity
Weight: 0.70
, power plant
Weight: 0.68
, gas
Weight: 0.63

Related properties

Property Similarity
be vs ordinal utility 1.00
be vs utility 0.87

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(utility, be vs ordinal utility)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(utility, be vs utility)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(utility, be vs utility)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Salient(utility, be vs utility)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Remarkable(utility, be vs utility)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(utility, be vs ordinal utility)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(utility, be vs ordinal utility) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(utility, be vs ordinal utility)