lake: be at new mexico

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents freshwater
Weight: 0.64
, valley
Weight: 0.63
, spring
Weight: 0.62
, salt water
Weight: 0.61
Siblings great salt lake
Weight: 0.80
, marsh
Weight: 0.59
, creek
Weight: 0.56
, crater
Weight: 0.50
, sea water
Weight: 0.36

Related properties

Property Similarity
be at new mexico 1.00
be at florida 0.80
be at new york 0.79
be at oklahoma 0.79
be at michigan 0.78
be at louisiana 0.78
be at utah 0.78
be at africa 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(marsh, be at florida)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(marsh, be at louisiana)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
Remarkable(marsh, be at louisiana) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Plausible(marsh, be at louisiana)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
Remarkable(marsh, be at florida) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Plausible(marsh, be at florida)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Salient(lake, be at new mexico)

Similarity expansion

0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Salient(lake, be at michigan)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Salient(lake, be at oklahoma)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at oklahoma)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.31
Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at michigan)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.12
¬ Salient(lake, be at florida)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.21
Salient(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico)

Typical implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.46
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.16
Plausible(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(lake, be at new mexico)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(marsh, be at florida)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Remarkable(lake, be at new mexico) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(marsh, be at louisiana)