buffet: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents place
Weight: 0.56
, furniture
Weight: 0.55
, option
Weight: 0.54
, restaurant
Weight: 0.51
Siblings dining table
Weight: 0.34
, fast food restaurant
Weight: 0.34
, seafood restaurant
Weight: 0.34
, steakhouse
Weight: 0.34
, italian restaurant
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality price 0.78
has quality prices 0.77

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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.21
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Salient(buffet, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(buffet, has quality good)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(buffet, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.67
Salient(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(buffet, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(buffet, has quality price)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.71
Typical(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(buffet, has quality prices)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(buffet, has quality price)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(buffet, has quality prices)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.67
Salient(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Salient(buffet, has quality price)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.67
Salient(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Salient(buffet, has quality prices)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality price)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality prices)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Salient(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.63
Plausible(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(buffet, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(buffet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality good)