chinese food: be served in box

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents fast food
Weight: 0.75
, food
Weight: 0.70
, meal
Weight: 0.61
, chinese restaurant
Weight: 0.58
, thing
Weight: 0.58
Siblings dim sum
Weight: 0.60
, noodle
Weight: 0.54
, pet food
Weight: 0.40
, mexican food
Weight: 0.39
, junk food
Weight: 0.38

Related properties

Property Similarity
be served in box 1.00
be served 0.86
come in boxes 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Remarkable(mexican food, be served)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
Remarkable(mexican food, be served) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(mexican food, be served)

Salient implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Salient(chinese food, be served in box)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(chinese food, be served)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(chinese food, come in boxes)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(chinese food, be served)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Salient(chinese food, come in boxes)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.16
Typical(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Typical(chinese food, come in boxes)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.07
Remarkable(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, come in boxes)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Salient(chinese food, be served)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.21
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.07
Remarkable(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, be served)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.14
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.04
Salient(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, be served in box)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(chinese food, be served in box)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, be served in box) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Typical(mexican food, be served)