warranty: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents contract
Weight: 0.64
, provision
Weight: 0.60
, item
Weight: 0.59
, factor
Weight: 0.58
Siblings supplier
Weight: 0.58
, presentment
Weight: 0.40
, lease
Weight: 0.32
, household appliance
Weight: 0.32
, deductible
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
has quality service 0.79
has quality price 0.78
be bad for game 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

0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(provision, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(provision, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(contract, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(item, be bad for game) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(contract, has quality price) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(provision, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(contract, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(provision, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(contract, has quality price)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(item, be bad for game)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(provision, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(provision, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(contract, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(item, be bad for game)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Remarkable(contract, has quality price)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(lease, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(deductible, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(lease, has quality better)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(provision, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(warranty, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.77
Plausible(provision, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(warranty, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(contract, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(warranty, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(item, be bad for game) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(warranty, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.55
Plausible(contract, has quality price) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(warranty, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(lease, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(lease, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
Remarkable(deductible, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(deductible, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(lease, has quality better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(lease, has quality better)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(warranty, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality service)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(warranty, has quality service)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Salient(warranty, has quality service)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality service)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Typical(warranty, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(contract, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(provision, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(contract, has quality price)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(provision, has quality good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(item, be bad for game)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(lease, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(deductible, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(lease, has quality better)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(contract, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(provision, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(provision, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(contract, has quality price)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.68
Typical(warranty, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(item, be bad for game)