hot dog: be good

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents animal fat
Weight: 0.72
, fast food
Weight: 0.70
, favorite
Weight: 0.68
, junk food
Weight: 0.67
, item
Weight: 0.67
Siblings dog food
Weight: 0.38
, pet food
Weight: 0.36
, hot sauce
Weight: 0.35
, chocolate bar
Weight: 0.34
, soft drink
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be good 1.00
be bad for you 0.87
be cheap but not that good 0.82
be bad for your health 0.82
be bad for person to eat 0.81
be good for lunch 0.78
be best serve warm 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

0.62
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(junk food, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.60
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.17
Plausible(fast food, be cheap but not that good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(fast food, be bad for your health) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.07
Plausible(junk food, be bad for person to eat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Plausible(junk food, be bad for person to eat)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(fast food, be bad for your health)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(fast food, be cheap but not that good)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.27
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(junk food, be good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(fast food, be bad for your health)
0.28
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(junk food, be good)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(junk food, be bad for person to eat)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Remarkable(fast food, be cheap but not that good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(junk food, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.17
Plausible(fast food, be cheap but not that good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(fast food, be bad for your health) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.07
Plausible(junk food, be bad for person to eat) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.11
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Salient(hot dog, be good)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be bad for you)
0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Salient(hot dog, be bad for you)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be bad for you)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be good for lunch)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good for lunch)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(hot dog, be good for lunch)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be best serve warm)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(hot dog, be best serve warm)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Salient(hot dog, be best serve warm)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Plausible(hot dog, be best serve warm)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good for lunch)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(hot dog, be bad for you)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.71
Salient(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.15
Plausible(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(hot dog, be good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, be cheap but not that good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(junk food, be bad for person to eat)
0.18
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(junk food, be good)
0.16
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(fast food, be bad for your health)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.30
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(fast food, be cheap but not that good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(junk food, be bad for person to eat)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(junk food, be good)
0.22
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.48
Typical(hot dog, be good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(fast food, be bad for your health)