local: is food better

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents neighborhood
Weight: 0.53
, work
Weight: 0.52
, volunteer
Weight: 0.51
, visitor
Weight: 0.51
, person
Weight: 0.51
Siblings greenwich village
Weight: 0.32
, other person
Weight: 0.31
, south park
Weight: 0.30
, homeless person
Weight: 0.30
, municipality
Weight: 0.30

Related properties

Property Similarity
is food better 1.00
is food 0.91
be healthier food 0.89
is sustainable food better 0.89
is sustainable food 0.82
has quality better 0.81

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

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(local, is food better)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(local, is sustainable food better)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(local, be healthier food)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Salient(local, is food)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(local, is food)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Remarkable(local, is sustainable food)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Plausible(local, is food)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(local, is food)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Salient(local, is sustainable food better)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Salient(local, be healthier food)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Salient(local, is sustainable food)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.77
Remarkable(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Remarkable(local, has quality better)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Salient(local, has quality better)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(local, has quality better)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(local, has quality better)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Plausible(local, is sustainable food better)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Plausible(local, be healthier food)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(local, is sustainable food)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(local, is sustainable food better)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Typical(local, be healthier food)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.55
Typical(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Typical(local, is sustainable food)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.74
Salient(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(local, is food better)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Plausible(local, is food better) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(local, is food better)