chicken: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents dish
Weight: 0.68
, meat
Weight: 0.68
, pet
Weight: 0.66
, entree
Weight: 0.66
, frozen food
Weight: 0.65
Siblings broiler
Weight: 0.53
, dark meat
Weight: 0.42
, lunch meat
Weight: 0.38
, potato salad
Weight: 0.38
, fried egg
Weight: 0.38

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
be good for us 0.80
be good for people 0.79
look good 0.78
be bad for environment 0.77
is best 0.76
be bad company work for 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

0.62
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(pet, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(pet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(meat, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(pet, be good for us) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(pet, be good for people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(dish, be bad company work for) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(dish, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.29
Plausible(meat, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.25
Plausible(meat, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(meat, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(pet, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(meat, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(dish, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Plausible(pet, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(pet, be good for us)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(meat, be bad for environment)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(pet, be good for people)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(dish, be bad company work for)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.44
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(meat, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(dish, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(meat, be bad for environment)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(dish, be bad company work for)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(pet, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(pet, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(meat, has quality good)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(pet, be good for us)
0.17
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(pet, be good for people)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Remarkable(fried egg, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(lunch meat, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Remarkable(fried egg, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(potato salad, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(lunch meat, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.94
Plausible(pet, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(meat, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.88
Plausible(pet, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(dish, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.29
Plausible(meat, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.93
Plausible(pet, be good for us) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(pet, be good for people) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.56
Plausible(dish, be bad company work for) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.25
Plausible(meat, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(chicken, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.60
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(lunch meat, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(lunch meat, has quality good)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
Remarkable(potato salad, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(potato salad, has quality good)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
Remarkable(fried egg, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(fried egg, has quality good)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
Remarkable(fried egg, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(fried egg, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
Remarkable(lunch meat, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(lunch meat, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Salient(chicken, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 1.00
Salient(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.95
Plausible(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(chicken, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(meat, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(dish, has quality bad)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(meat, be bad for environment)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(meat, has quality good)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(dish, be bad company work for)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(pet, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.16
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(pet, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.19
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(pet, be good for people)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.16
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(pet, be good for us)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(fried egg, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Typical(lunch meat, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.36
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(lunch meat, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(fried egg, has quality good)
0.02
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.18
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(potato salad, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(meat, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(pet, has quality good)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(meat, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(dish, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(pet, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(pet, be good for us)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(pet, be good for people)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(meat, be bad for environment)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.98
Typical(chicken, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(dish, be bad company work for)