lunch: has quality good

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents meal
Weight: 0.67
, dinner
Weight: 0.63
, free time
Weight: 0.61
, hour
Weight: 0.58
, program
Weight: 0.58
Siblings breakfast
Weight: 0.37
, brunch
Weight: 0.37
, supper
Weight: 0.36
, salad
Weight: 0.36
, hamburger
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality good 1.00
has quality bad 0.96
is quality 0.91
is good for 0.86
has quality wrong 0.85
be good for people 0.79
taste good 0.79
is good healthy food 0.79
is good food 0.78
has quality question 0.77

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: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(dinner, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(meal, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(program, is quality)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(dinner, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(meal, is good for)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(meal, has quality wrong)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(meal, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(meal, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(dinner, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(meal, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Plausible(meal, has quality wrong)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(program, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Plausible(dinner, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(meal, is good for)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(program, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.49
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Remarkable(meal, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Remarkable(meal, has quality wrong)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Remarkable(dinner, has quality bad)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(meal, is good for)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(program, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(meal, has quality good)
0.21
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.37
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(dinner, has quality good)
0.15
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Remarkable(program, is quality)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(breakfast, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(hamburger, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(supper, has quality wrong)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(hamburger, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(supper, has quality question)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(salad, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(salad, taste good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(breakfast, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Remarkable(supper, has quality good)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(breakfast, be good for people)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(salad, is good healthy food)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.41
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(dinner, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(meal, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.65
Plausible(program, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.37
Plausible(dinner, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(program, is quality)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.11
Plausible(meal, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(meal, is good for)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.26
Plausible(meal, has quality wrong)
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.57
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
Remarkable(supper, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(supper, has quality good)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.07
Remarkable(breakfast, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Plausible(breakfast, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(breakfast, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Plausible(breakfast, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(salad, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Plausible(salad, has quality good)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.19
Remarkable(hamburger, has quality bad)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(hamburger, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(hamburger, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(hamburger, has quality good)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.16
Remarkable(supper, has quality wrong)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(supper, has quality wrong)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(salad, taste good)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(salad, taste good)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.71
Remarkable(salad, is good healthy food)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Plausible(salad, is good healthy food)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(breakfast, be good for people)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(breakfast, be good for people)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.43
Remarkable(supper, has quality question)
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(supper, has quality question)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Salient(lunch, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Salient(lunch, has quality bad)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality bad)
0.77
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Plausible(lunch, has quality bad)
0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
Salient(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.64
Plausible(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Typical(lunch, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.35
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(meal, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(dinner, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(program, is quality)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(meal, has quality wrong)
0.25
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(meal, has quality good)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(meal, is good for)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(dinner, has quality good)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(program, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(breakfast, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(supper, has quality wrong)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Typical(hamburger, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(salad, taste good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.63
¬ Typical(supper, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.51
¬ Typical(supper, has quality question)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(breakfast, has quality good)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(salad, has quality good)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.39
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(salad, is good healthy food)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.79
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(breakfast, be good for people)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.23
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(hamburger, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Typical(meal, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(dinner, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(meal, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Typical(program, is quality)
0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Typical(dinner, has quality good)
0.33
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Typical(meal, has quality wrong)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Typical(program, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.59
Typical(lunch, has quality good)
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Typical(meal, is good for)