waste: be issue in australia

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents topic
Weight: 0.61
, action
Weight: 0.59
, resource
Weight: 0.58
, substance
Weight: 0.57
, issue
Weight: 0.57
Siblings compost
Weight: 0.56
, trichloroethylene
Weight: 0.42
, composting
Weight: 0.34
, trash
Weight: 0.33
, landfill
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
be issue in australia 1.00
be problem in australia 0.94
is issue 0.77
be allocated in usa 0.75

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

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(trash, is issue)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.88
Remarkable(trash, is issue)
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(trash, is issue)

Salient implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Salient(waste, be issue in australia)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.63
Typical(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Typical(waste, is issue)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(waste, is issue)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(waste, be problem in australia)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.25
Salient(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(waste, is issue)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.63
Typical(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(waste, be problem in australia)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(waste, be problem in australia)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.94
Evidence: 0.25
Salient(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Salient(waste, be problem in australia)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(waste, is issue)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.25
Salient(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(waste, be issue in australia)

Typical implies Plausible

0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(waste, be issue in australia)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(waste, be issue in australia)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Typical(trash, is issue)