mountain dew: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents soft drink
Weight: 0.69
, drink
Weight: 0.66
, carbonated beverage
Weight: 0.64
, brand
Weight: 0.61
, soda
Weight: 0.59
Siblings drinking water
Weight: 0.34
, coca cola
Weight: 0.33
, bottled water
Weight: 0.33
, alpine
Weight: 0.33
, drinking beer
Weight: 0.32

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
be bad for guys 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

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.58
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(soda, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(soft drink, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(drink, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(brand, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.11
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(soft drink, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(soft drink, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(brand, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(drink, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.87
¬ Plausible(soft drink, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(soda, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.57
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(soft drink, has quality bad)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.54
¬ Remarkable(soda, has quality good)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(soft drink, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(brand, has quality good)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(drink, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Remarkable(drinking beer, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Remarkable(bottled water, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(bottled water, has quality good)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.71
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(coca cola, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(soda, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.87
Plausible(soft drink, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.37
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.84
Plausible(drink, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.80
Plausible(brand, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.02
Plausible(soft drink, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
Remarkable(drinking beer, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Plausible(drinking beer, has quality bad)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
Remarkable(bottled water, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(bottled water, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(coca cola, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Plausible(coca cola, has quality good)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
Remarkable(bottled water, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(bottled water, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Salient(mountain dew, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.74
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, has quality good)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Salient(mountain dew, has quality good)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(mountain dew, be bad for guys)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(mountain dew, be bad for guys)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Plausible(mountain dew, be bad for guys)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, be bad for guys)
0.51
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Salient(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.79
Plausible(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(soft drink, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(brand, has quality good)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(drink, has quality good)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(soft drink, has quality good)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(soda, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Typical(drinking beer, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(bottled water, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Typical(coca cola, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.58
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Remarkable(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Typical(bottled water, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.48
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(soft drink, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(brand, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Typical(drink, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(soft drink, has quality good)
0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Typical(mountain dew, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Typical(soda, has quality good)