beverage: has quality bad

Related concepts

Parents	alcoholic beverage Weight: 0.78 , segment Weight: 0.61 , snack Weight: 0.61 , item Weight: 0.59 , liquor Weight: 0.58
Siblings	soda pop Weight: 0.71 , white wine Weight: 0.70 , hot coffee Weight: 0.69 , vodka Weight: 0.67 , beer Weight: 0.66

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality bad	1.00
has quality worth	0.82
go bad	0.79

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.51

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.60

Plausible(liquor, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(beverage, has quality bad)

0.31

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.27

Plausible(liquor, go bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(beverage, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.27

¬ Plausible(liquor, go bad)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.60

¬ Plausible(liquor, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.51

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.50

¬ Remarkable(liquor, has quality bad)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Remarkable(liquor, go bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.04

¬ Remarkable(white wine, go bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.60

Plausible(liquor, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.22

Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

¬ Plausible(beverage, has quality bad)

0.27

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.27

Plausible(liquor, go bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.22

Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.34

¬ Plausible(beverage, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.47

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.04

Remarkable(white wine, go bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.03

¬ Plausible(white wine, go bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.26

¬ Salient(beverage, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.64

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.07

¬ Plausible(beverage, go bad)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.26

Salient(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Salient(beverage, go bad)

0.63

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.22

Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.09

¬ Remarkable(beverage, go bad)

0.59

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.30

¬ Typical(beverage, go bad)

0.52

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.59

¬ Typical(beverage, has quality worth)

0.40

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.65

¬ Plausible(beverage, has quality worth)

0.26

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.26

Salient(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Salient(beverage, has quality worth)

0.25

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.82

Evidence: 0.22

Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality worth)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.26

Salient(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.34

Plausible(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(beverage, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.43

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Typical(liquor, has quality bad)

0.36

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(liquor, go bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.22

¬ Remarkable(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.24

¬ Typical(white wine, go bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.69

¬ Typical(liquor, has quality bad)

0.31

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.79

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(beverage, has quality bad) ⋁

Evidence: 0.48

¬ Typical(liquor, go bad)