asparagus: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents dish
Weight: 0.68
, vegetable
Weight: 0.68
, fresh fruit
Weight: 0.66
, crop
Weight: 0.64
, food
Weight: 0.63
Siblings tomato sauce
Weight: 0.39
, cauliflower
Weight: 0.39
, eggplant
Weight: 0.39
, fruit salad
Weight: 0.38

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
be bad for environment 0.80
be good for us 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.63
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality bad)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(vegetable, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(dish, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(dish, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(vegetable, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(food, has quality bad)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(food, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.53
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(dish, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(vegetable, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(food, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(food, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(eggplant, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(cauliflower, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(fruit salad, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(tomato sauce, has quality good)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(cauliflower, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(vegetable, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(dish, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(eggplant, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(eggplant, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
Remarkable(cauliflower, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(cauliflower, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(cauliflower, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(cauliflower, has quality bad)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(fruit salad, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(fruit salad, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(tomato sauce, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(tomato sauce, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(asparagus, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality good)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(asparagus, be bad for environment)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(asparagus, be bad for environment)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(asparagus, be bad for environment)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(asparagus, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(asparagus, be good for us)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, be bad for environment)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Salient(asparagus, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(asparagus, be good for us)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(asparagus, be good for us)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.36
Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, be good for us)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Salient(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(asparagus, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(dish, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(vegetable, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(food, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(food, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(eggplant, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(cauliflower, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(fruit salad, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(cauliflower, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(tomato sauce, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(dish, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(food, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(vegetable, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Typical(asparagus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(food, has quality good)