vole: has physical part holes

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents creature
Weight: 0.60
, rodent
Weight: 0.55
, prey
Weight: 0.55
, mammal
Weight: 0.54
, wildlife
Weight: 0.50
Siblings otter
Weight: 0.36
, squirrel
Weight: 0.35
, lizard
Weight: 0.35
, tree frog
Weight: 0.35
, beaver
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has physical part holes 1.00
has physical part hole 0.95
dig holes 0.83

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

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(lizard, dig holes)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
Remarkable(lizard, dig holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(lizard, dig holes)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(vole, has physical part holes)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(vole, dig holes)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Remarkable(vole, dig holes)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Salient(vole, dig holes)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Salient(vole, has physical part hole)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(vole, has physical part hole)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(vole, has physical part hole)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.95
Evidence: 0.52
Typical(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(vole, has physical part hole)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.52
Typical(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(vole, dig holes)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Salient(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(vole, has physical part holes)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(vole, has physical part holes)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(vole, has physical part holes) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(lizard, dig holes)