mcdonald: has coke taste

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents food chain
Weight: 0.65
, restaurant
Weight: 0.62
, fast food restaurant
Weight: 0.62
, chain
Weight: 0.62
, fast food chain
Weight: 0.61
Siblings mcdonalds
Weight: 0.37
, italian restaurant
Weight: 0.36
, chinese restaurant
Weight: 0.35
, mexican restaurant
Weight: 0.35
, indian restaurant
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
has coke taste 1.00
has coke 0.94
has diet coke 0.89
taste good 0.78
ketchup taste 0.78
ketchup better taste 0.78
ketchup taste different 0.77
taste different 0.77
pop better taste 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

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(mcdonalds, taste different)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(mcdonalds, taste good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(mcdonalds, taste good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.68
¬ Plausible(mcdonalds, taste good)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
Remarkable(mcdonalds, taste different) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(mcdonalds, taste different)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Salient(mcdonald, has coke taste)

Similarity expansion

0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.33
Remarkable(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.19
¬ Remarkable(mcdonald, has diet coke)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Salient(mcdonald, has diet coke)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Plausible(mcdonald, has diet coke)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.61
Typical(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Typical(mcdonald, has diet coke)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.36
Salient(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(mcdonald, has coke taste)

Typical implies Plausible

0.32
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.46
Plausible(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(mcdonald, has coke taste)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(mcdonalds, taste different)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(mcdonald, has coke taste) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(mcdonalds, taste good)