frying: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents method
Weight: 0.48
, cooking
Weight: 0.44
, process
Weight: 0.43
, way
Weight: 0.38
, preparation
Weight: 0.36
Siblings microwave oven
Weight: 0.32
, kitchen utensil
Weight: 0.30
, boiling water
Weight: 0.30
, cold turkey
Weight: 0.30
, burning
Weight: 0.30

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
is quality 0.87
has quality wrong 0.87
has quality help 0.86
has quality change 0.86
be bad for environment 0.80
is bad thing 0.79
has quality questions 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

0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(preparation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(cooking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(way, has quality help) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(preparation, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(cooking, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(cooking, has quality change)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(method, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(way, has quality help)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(cooking, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(process, is quality)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(preparation, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(preparation, has quality questions)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.51
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(method, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(preparation, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(cooking, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(cooking, has quality change)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(way, has quality help)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(process, is quality)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Remarkable(preparation, has quality questions)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Remarkable(boiling water, has quality bad)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality good)
0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(microwave oven, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality change)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(burning, be bad for environment)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(burning, is bad thing)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.86
Plausible(preparation, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Plausible(method, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.78
Plausible(cooking, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Plausible(process, is quality) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(way, has quality help) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(cooking, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.69
Plausible(preparation, has quality questions) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.51
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(burning, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
Remarkable(burning, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality good)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
Remarkable(boiling water, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Plausible(boiling water, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(microwave oven, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(microwave oven, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, has quality wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality wrong)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
Remarkable(burning, has quality change) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(burning, has quality change)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(burning, is bad thing) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(burning, is bad thing)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(burning, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(burning, be bad for environment)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Salient(frying, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality change)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.25
¬ Salient(frying, has quality change)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(frying, has quality change)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Plausible(frying, has quality change)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.33
Salient(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(frying, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(cooking, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(cooking, has quality change)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(way, has quality help)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality questions)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(boiling water, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(burning, has quality good)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(burning, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(microwave oven, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(burning, has quality change)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(burning, has quality wrong)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(burning, be bad for environment)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(burning, is bad thing)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Typical(method, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(cooking, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Typical(cooking, has quality change)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(process, is quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(way, has quality help)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.70
Typical(frying, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(preparation, has quality questions)