bad food: be at hotel

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents thing
Weight: 0.67
, problem
Weight: 0.57
, issue
Weight: 0.54
, food
Weight: 0.54
Siblings junk food
Weight: 0.81
, chocolate milk
Weight: 0.72
, salt
Weight: 0.60
, donut
Weight: 0.55
, rotten food
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
be at hotel 1.00
be at in restaurant 0.81
be at fast-food restaurant 0.80
be at restaurant 0.80
be find in restaurant 0.79

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

0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(food, be at in restaurant)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(food, be at fast-food restaurant)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(food, be at restaurant)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(food, be at restaurant)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(food, be at hotel)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(food, be at restaurant)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Plausible(food, be at restaurant)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(food, be at in restaurant)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(food, be at fast-food restaurant)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.57
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(food, be at hotel)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(food, be at in restaurant)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(food, be at restaurant)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(food, be at restaurant)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(food, be at fast-food restaurant)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(salt, be at fast-food restaurant)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(junk food, be at fast-food restaurant)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
Plausible(food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.08
Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(food, be at in restaurant)
Evidence: 0.08
Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.59
Plausible(food, be at fast-food restaurant)
Evidence: 0.08
Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(food, be at restaurant)
Evidence: 0.08
Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.48
Plausible(food, be at restaurant)
Evidence: 0.08
Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.21
Remarkable(salt, be at fast-food restaurant)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(salt, be at fast-food restaurant)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(junk food, be at fast-food restaurant)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(junk food, be at fast-food restaurant)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Salient(bad food, be at hotel)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)

Typical implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.12
Plausible(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Typical(bad food, be at hotel)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(food, be at hotel)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(food, be at in restaurant)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(food, be at fast-food restaurant)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(food, be at restaurant)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(food, be at restaurant)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(junk food, be at fast-food restaurant)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Remarkable(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(salt, be at fast-food restaurant)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(food, be at hotel)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Typical(food, be at fast-food restaurant)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Typical(food, be at in restaurant)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(food, be at restaurant)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.72
Typical(bad food, be at hotel)
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Typical(food, be at restaurant)