fast food: do more harm than good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents fast food restaurant
Weight: 0.85
, junk food
Weight: 0.83
, commodity
Weight: 0.68
, food
Weight: 0.66
, industry
Weight: 0.65
Siblings chinese food
Weight: 0.75
, hot dog
Weight: 0.70
, pizza
Weight: 0.68
, meat
Weight: 0.63
, taco
Weight: 0.57

Related properties

Property Similarity
do more harm than good 1.00
be good for us 0.77
is harmful 0.77
be bad for environment 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

0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(junk food, is harmful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(fast food, do more harm than good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(junk food, be good for us) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(fast food, do more harm than good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(fast food, do more harm than good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(junk food, be good for us)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(junk food, is harmful)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(junk food, be good for us)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(junk food, is harmful)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(meat, be bad for environment)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(junk food, is harmful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(junk food, be good for us) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
Remarkable(meat, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Plausible(meat, be bad for environment)

Salient implies Plausible

0.18
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Salient(fast food, do more harm than good)

Similarity expansion

0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(fast food, be bad for environment)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Salient(fast food, be bad for environment)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(fast food, be bad for environment)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is harmful)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(fast food, be good for us)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.24
Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(fast food, be bad for environment)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(fast food, is harmful)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(fast food, be good for us)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(fast food, is harmful)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(fast food, be good for us)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.24
Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(fast food, is harmful)
0.19
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.28
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.24
Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(fast food, be good for us)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Salient(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(fast food, do more harm than good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.26
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(junk food, be good for us)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(junk food, is harmful)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Remarkable(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(meat, be bad for environment)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.24
Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)
0.14
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.24
Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(junk food, be good for us)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.24
Typical(fast food, do more harm than good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(junk food, is harmful)