watching: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents service
Weight: 0.48
, method
Weight: 0.48
, guy
Weight: 0.47
, match
Weight: 0.47
, thing
Weight: 0.46
Siblings remember
Weight: 0.31
, laughing
Weight: 0.31
, listening
Weight: 0.31
, living thing
Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
be in bad 0.87
be for time bad 0.82
be for long time bad 0.81
be considered bad 0.78
be in dark bad 0.77
be considered bad thing 0.76
be considered as bad stuff 0.76

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

0.63
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 1.00
Plausible(guy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, has quality bad)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(service, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Plausible(guy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(service, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Remarkable(guy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(laughing, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Remarkable(listening, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(listening, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 1.00
Plausible(guy, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(watching, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(watching, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(watching, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(laughing, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(laughing, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
Remarkable(listening, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(listening, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(listening, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(listening, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(watching, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, has quality good)
0.75
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(watching, has quality good)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Salient(watching, be in bad)
0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(watching, has quality good)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(watching, be in bad)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Plausible(watching, be in bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Salient(watching, be for time bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(watching, be for time bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Remarkable(watching, be in bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(watching, be for long time bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, be for long time bad)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Salient(watching, be in dark bad)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(watching, be for time bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(watching, be in dark bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(watching, be considered as bad stuff)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(watching, be considered bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(watching, be considered bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(watching, be in dark bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(watching, be considered bad thing)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(watching, be for long time bad)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Salient(watching, be considered bad thing)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(watching, be considered as bad stuff)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(watching, be in dark bad)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(watching, be considered as bad stuff)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(watching, be considered bad)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Plausible(watching, be considered bad thing)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(watching, be for time bad)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(watching, be for long time bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(watching, be considered bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(watching, be considered bad thing)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.57
Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(watching, be considered as bad stuff)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(watching, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(guy, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(laughing, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(listening, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(listening, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(service, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(watching, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(guy, has quality good)