wild animals: defend themselves

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents animal
Weight: 0.67
Siblings saber-toothed cat
Weight: 0.37
, prairie dog
Weight: 0.37
, cougar
Weight: 0.37
, llama
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
defend themselves 1.00
protect them 0.82

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

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(prairie dog, defend themselves)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(cougar, defend themselves)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(cougar, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(cougar, defend themselves)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
Remarkable(prairie dog, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(prairie dog, defend themselves)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(wild animals, defend themselves)

Similarity expansion

0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(wild animals, protect them)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.67
Typical(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(wild animals, protect them)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.63
Salient(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(wild animals, protect them)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(wild animals, protect them)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Salient(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(wild animals, defend themselves)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(wild animals, defend themselves)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(cougar, defend themselves)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(wild animals, defend themselves) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(prairie dog, defend themselves)