watching: has quality good

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 good	1.00
has quality bad	0.96
be in bad	0.77
be for long time bad	0.77
be for time bad	0.77

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.66

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 1.00

Plausible(guy, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, has quality good)

0.54

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.80

Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, has quality good)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(service, has quality good)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 1.00

¬ Plausible(guy, has quality good)

0.08

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.35

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)

0.24

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Remarkable(service, has quality good)

0.16

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 1.00

¬ Remarkable(guy, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.17

¬ Remarkable(laughing, has quality bad)

0.10

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.25

¬ Remarkable(listening, has quality bad)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Remarkable(listening, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.42

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 1.00

Plausible(guy, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Plausible(watching, has quality good)

0.40

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.80

Plausible(service, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Plausible(watching, has quality good)

0.37

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.71

Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.90

¬ Plausible(watching, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

Remarkable(listening, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(listening, has quality good)

0.56

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.17

Remarkable(laughing, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.26

¬ Plausible(laughing, has quality bad)

0.55

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.25

Remarkable(listening, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.46

¬ Plausible(listening, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.97

¬ Salient(watching, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.79

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.97

Salient(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.92

¬ Salient(watching, has quality bad)

0.76

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.93

Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, has quality bad)

0.74

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.86

¬ Plausible(watching, has quality bad)

0.69

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality bad)

0.65

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.97

Salient(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.38

¬ Salient(watching, be in bad)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.97

Salient(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Salient(watching, be for long time bad)

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.97

Salient(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.65

¬ Salient(watching, be for time bad)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Plausible(watching, be in bad)

0.62

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.93

Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Typical(watching, be in bad)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.93

Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Typical(watching, be for time bad)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.93

Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, be for long time bad)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Plausible(watching, be for time bad)

0.61

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.28

¬ Remarkable(watching, be in bad)

0.60

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(watching, be for long time bad)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.37

¬ Remarkable(watching, be for long time bad)

0.58

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.77

Evidence: 0.72

Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Remarkable(watching, be for time bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.97

Salient(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.90

Plausible(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.93

¬ Typical(watching, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.22

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Typical(service, has quality good)

0.20

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)

0.14

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 1.00

¬ Typical(guy, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Typical(laughing, has quality bad)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.70

¬ Typical(listening, has quality bad)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Remarkable(watching, has quality good) ⋁

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 good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Typical(service, has quality good)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.93

Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 1.00

¬ Typical(guy, has quality good)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.93

Typical(watching, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.81

¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)