fast food: is low quality

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
is low quality 1.00
is quality 0.87
has quality good 0.84
has quality bad 0.82

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

0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(junk food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(junk food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(junk food, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(junk food, is quality)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(junk food, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(junk food, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(food, has quality bad)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(food, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(junk food, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Remarkable(junk food, is quality)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(junk food, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(food, has quality bad)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Remarkable(food, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Remarkable(meat, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(pizza, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(meat, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(chinese food, is quality)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.98
Plausible(food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.90
Plausible(junk food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(junk food, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.92
Plausible(food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(junk food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(fast food, is low quality)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
Remarkable(chinese food, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(chinese food, is quality)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
Remarkable(hot dog, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(hot dog, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(meat, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(meat, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
Remarkable(meat, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(meat, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(pizza, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Plausible(pizza, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
Remarkable(chinese food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Plausible(chinese food, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Salient(fast food, is low quality)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(fast food, has quality bad)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Salient(fast food, has quality bad)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(fast food, has quality bad)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(fast food, has quality bad)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Typical(fast food, is quality)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Plausible(fast food, is quality)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(fast food, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(fast food, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Salient(fast food, is quality)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(fast food, has quality good)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.30
Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is quality)
0.24
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Salient(fast food, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.32
Plausible(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, is low quality)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(junk food, is quality)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(junk food, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(junk food, has quality bad)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(food, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(food, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(hot dog, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(chinese food, is quality)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(meat, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(meat, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(chinese food, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Remarkable(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(pizza, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(junk food, is quality)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(junk food, has quality bad)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(junk food, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.84
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 1.00
¬ Typical(food, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.50
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.49
Typical(fast food, is low quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(food, has quality bad)