webcam: is expensive

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents device
Weight: 0.66
, video
Weight: 0.58
, digital camera
Weight: 0.57
, thing
Weight: 0.57
, application
Weight: 0.55
Siblings laptop computer
Weight: 0.37
, computer keyboard
Weight: 0.36
, projector
Weight: 0.36
, computer monitor
Weight: 0.36
, tablet computer
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
is expensive 1.00
is overpriced 0.79
is ridiculously overpriced 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

0.66
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 1.00
Plausible(thing, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(webcam, is expensive)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(digital camera, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(webcam, is expensive)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(application, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(webcam, is expensive)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(application, is expensive)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(digital camera, is expensive)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Plausible(thing, is expensive)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(digital camera, is expensive)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(application, is expensive)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Remarkable(thing, is expensive)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(projector, is expensive)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(computer monitor, is expensive)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 1.00
Plausible(thing, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(webcam, is expensive)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(digital camera, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(webcam, is expensive)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(application, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(webcam, is expensive)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(computer monitor, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Plausible(computer monitor, is expensive)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(projector, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(projector, is expensive)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(webcam, is expensive)

Similarity expansion

0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(webcam, is overpriced)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(webcam, is ridiculously overpriced)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(webcam, is overpriced)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(webcam, is ridiculously overpriced)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(webcam, is overpriced)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(webcam, is ridiculously overpriced)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is overpriced)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.49
Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is ridiculously overpriced)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Salient(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(webcam, is expensive)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.28
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(application, is expensive)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(digital camera, is expensive)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(thing, is expensive)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(projector, is expensive)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Remarkable(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(computer monitor, is expensive)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(application, is expensive)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(digital camera, is expensive)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.96
Typical(webcam, is expensive) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(thing, is expensive)