 A critical advantage to the Lehmann-Magidor-Pearl 1-entailment system over Adams’s epsilon-entailment lies in the way in which 1-entailment handles irrelevant information. Suppose, for example, that we know that birds fly \((B \Rightarrow F)\), Tweety is a bird \((B)\), and Nemo is a whale \((W)\). These premises do not epsilon-entail \(F\) (that Tweety flies), since there is no guarantee that a probability function assign a high probability to \(F\), given the conjunction of \(B\) and \(W\). In contrast, 1-entailment does give us the conclusion \(F\).