xml: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents database
Weight: 0.62
, standard
Weight: 0.61
, technology
Weight: 0.60
, programming language
Weight: 0.58
, tool
Weight: 0.57
Siblings css
Weight: 0.58
, php
Weight: 0.35
, perl
Weight: 0.35
, sql
Weight: 0.34
, ajax
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
be better for e-commerce 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

0.59
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(database, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(standard, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(programming language, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(technology, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(technology, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(technology, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Plausible(technology, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(standard, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(database, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(tool, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Plausible(programming language, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(programming language, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(technology, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(tool, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(database, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(standard, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(sql, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(php, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(perl, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(ajax, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(css, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(php, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(tool, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Plausible(database, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(standard, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(technology, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.66
Plausible(programming language, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.21
Plausible(technology, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
Remarkable(php, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(php, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(ajax, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(ajax, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(perl, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(perl, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(css, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(css, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(sql, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(sql, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(php, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(php, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Salient(xml, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(xml, has quality bad)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(xml, has quality bad)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(xml, has quality bad)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality bad)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(xml, be better for e-commerce)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, be better for e-commerce)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(xml, be better for e-commerce)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(xml, be better for e-commerce)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Salient(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(xml, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(standard, has quality good)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(database, has quality good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(programming language, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(sql, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(php, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(ajax, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(perl, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(php, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(css, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(technology, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(standard, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(database, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(tool, has quality good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(technology, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(xml, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(programming language, has quality bad)