customer: be at internet cafe

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents computer user
Weight: 0.65
, fan
Weight: 0.64
, constituent
Weight: 0.63
, business
Weight: 0.61
Siblings employer
Weight: 0.63
, intel
Weight: 0.60
, asset
Weight: 0.59
, operator
Weight: 0.59
, citizen
Weight: 0.58

Related properties

Property Similarity
be at internet cafe 1.00
be find in restaurant 0.76

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

0.34
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(computer user, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(customer, be at internet cafe)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(computer user, be at internet cafe)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.56
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(computer user, be at internet cafe)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.43
Plausible(computer user, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.06
Remarkable(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(customer, be at internet cafe)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Salient(customer, be at internet cafe)

Similarity expansion

0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(customer, be find in restaurant)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(customer, be find in restaurant)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.07
Salient(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Salient(customer, be find in restaurant)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.06
Remarkable(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Remarkable(customer, be find in restaurant)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.07
Salient(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(customer, be at internet cafe)

Typical implies Plausible

0.12
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.13
Plausible(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(customer, be at internet cafe)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(computer user, be at internet cafe)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.86
Typical(customer, be at internet cafe)
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(computer user, be at internet cafe)