wildlife: has state extinction

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents land
Weight: 0.62
, resource
Weight: 0.58
, subject
Weight: 0.56
, attraction
Weight: 0.55
, topic
Weight: 0.55
Siblings geyser
Weight: 0.43
, national forest
Weight: 0.35
, wetland
Weight: 0.35
, conservation
Weight: 0.34
, animal husbandry
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has state extinction 1.00
be endangered in antarctica 0.76
is endangered 0.76
has state depletion 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: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(wetland, is endangered)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(wetland, is endangered) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(wetland, is endangered)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(wildlife, has state extinction)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(wildlife, be endangered in antarctica)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(wildlife, be endangered in antarctica)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(wildlife, is endangered)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(wildlife, is endangered)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(wildlife, be endangered in antarctica)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(wildlife, is endangered)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(wildlife, be endangered in antarctica)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(wildlife, is endangered)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Salient(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(wildlife, has state extinction)

Typical implies Plausible

0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(wildlife, has state extinction)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(wildlife, has state extinction) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(wetland, is endangered)