witch: were teasted

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents creature
Weight: 0.66
, thing
Weight: 0.58
, enemy
Weight: 0.57
, story
Weight: 0.56
, name
Weight: 0.56
Siblings fairy
Weight: 0.36
, komodo dragon
Weight: 0.36
, werewolf
Weight: 0.36
, mermaid
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
were identifiled 1.00
were teasted 1.00
were kelled in shakespeares time 0.90
were found 0.86
were women 0.82
were treated in 1600 0.81
were popular in shakesperes time 0.81
were dangerous 0.80
were discovered 0.80
were treated 0.80

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Salient(witch, were teasted)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Typical(witch, were identifiled)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(witch, were kelled in shakespeares time)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Salient(witch, were kelled in shakespeares time)
0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Remarkable(witch, were kelled in shakespeares time)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(witch, were kelled in shakespeares time)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(witch, were identifiled)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(witch, were found)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(witch, were treated)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Salient(witch, were identifiled)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(witch, were found)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Plausible(witch, were treated)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.41
¬ Remarkable(witch, were women)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(witch, were discovered)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Salient(witch, were treated)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(witch, were dangerous)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(witch, were women)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(witch, were women)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(witch, were found)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(witch, were discovered)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(witch, were women)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(witch, were treated)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(witch, were identifiled)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(witch, were dangerous)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(witch, were found)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(witch, were dangerous)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(witch, were discovered)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Salient(witch, were discovered)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(witch, were dangerous)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Salient(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(witch, were teasted)

Typical implies Plausible

0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
Plausible(witch, were teasted)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(witch, were teasted)