| Similarity | Rank | |
|---|---|---|
| the_most_efficient | 0.840 | 31596 |
| the_most_effective | 0.677 | 11159 |
| efficient | 0.665 | 2805 |
| most_effective | 0.633 | 18051 |
| more_efficient | 0.618 | 7315 |
| an_efficient | 0.603 | 16489 |
| the_most_reliable | 0.599 | 55167 |
| cost_efficient | 0.582 | 94706 |
| very_efficient | 0.578 | 93713 |
| highly_efficient | 0.574 | 40901 |
| a_more_efficient | 0.569 | 42459 |
| most_useful | 0.563 | 24538 |
| the_most_convenient | 0.561 | 96003 |
| the_most_suitable | 0.557 | 60378 |
| cost-effective | 0.556 | 12088 |
| most_comfortable | 0.554 | 56628 |
| the_most_productive | 0.553 | 62099 |
| the_most_profitable | 0.544 | 98319 |
| cost_effective | 0.540 | 15101 |
| cost-efficient | 0.539 | 81922 |
| the_most_appropriate | 0.530 | 24581 |
| good | 0.525 | 62 |
| more_economical | 0.524 | 84513 |
| the_most_advanced | 0.519 | 25775 |
| optimal | 0.517 | 8814 |