mexican restaurant: be at texas

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents restaurant
Weight: 0.74
, place
Weight: 0.59
, thing
Weight: 0.52
, favorite
Weight: 0.51
Siblings italian restaurant
Weight: 0.42
, chinese restaurant
Weight: 0.41
, french restaurant
Weight: 0.40
, indian restaurant
Weight: 0.40
, seafood restaurant
Weight: 0.40

Related properties

Property Similarity
be at texas 1.00
be at michigan 0.80
be at mexico 0.80
be at california 0.80
be at chicago 0.77
be consider high-class and expensive in america 0.76
be at boston 0.76
be at india 0.75
be at southern california 0.75
be at nyc 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

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(chinese restaurant, be at michigan)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(italian restaurant, be at chicago)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(french restaurant, be consider high-class and expensive in america)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(seafood restaurant, be at boston)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Remarkable(indian restaurant, be at india)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(french restaurant, be at nyc)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.42
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.03
Remarkable(chinese restaurant, be at michigan)
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(chinese restaurant, be at michigan)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(french restaurant, be consider high-class and expensive in america)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Plausible(french restaurant, be consider high-class and expensive in america)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.03
Remarkable(italian restaurant, be at chicago)
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Plausible(italian restaurant, be at chicago)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.05
Remarkable(seafood restaurant, be at boston)
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(seafood restaurant, be at boston)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.40
Remarkable(french restaurant, be at nyc)
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Plausible(french restaurant, be at nyc)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.16
Remarkable(indian restaurant, be at india)
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(indian restaurant, be at india)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Salient(mexican restaurant, be at texas)

Similarity expansion

0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.09
Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at california)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
Salient(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.06
¬ Salient(mexican restaurant, be at california)
0.62
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Typical(mexican restaurant, be at mexico)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.09
Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at southern california)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.11
Salient(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.08
¬ Salient(mexican restaurant, be at southern california)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.22
¬ Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at california)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at southern california)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(mexican restaurant, be at california)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.65
Typical(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Typical(mexican restaurant, be at southern california)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at mexico)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.52
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.09
Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at mexico)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.11
Salient(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Salient(mexican restaurant, be at mexico)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.11
Salient(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)

Typical implies Plausible

0.24
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.51
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.24
Plausible(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Typical(mexican restaurant, be at texas)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(chinese restaurant, be at michigan)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(french restaurant, be at nyc)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.75
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Typical(indian restaurant, be at india)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Typical(seafood restaurant, be at boston)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(italian restaurant, be at chicago)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Remarkable(mexican restaurant, be at texas)
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(french restaurant, be consider high-class and expensive in america)