mouse: be at computer lab

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents rodent
Weight: 0.63
, organism
Weight: 0.61
, creature
Weight: 0.61
, antibody
Weight: 0.60
Siblings computer mouse
Weight: 0.68
, kangaroo rat
Weight: 0.35
, cat
Weight: 0.35
, rat
Weight: 0.34
, lizard
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be at computer lab 1.00
be at lab 0.95
be at animal lab 0.89
be at laboratory 0.88
be at computer 0.87
be at computer store 0.86
be at research laboratory 0.85
be a part of computer 0.85
be at lab cage 0.83
be at computer shop 0.83

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

0.09
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
¬ Remarkable(lizard, be at laboratory)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(rat, be at laboratory)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(rat, be at laboratory) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Plausible(rat, be at laboratory)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.26
Remarkable(lizard, be at laboratory) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Plausible(lizard, be at laboratory)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Salient(mouse, be at computer lab)

Similarity expansion

0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Salient(mouse, be at computer)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(mouse, be at computer store)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be a part of computer)
0.64
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Salient(mouse, be a part of computer)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Plausible(mouse, be at research laboratory)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer store)
0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.74
Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at research laboratory)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(mouse, be at computer store)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.42
¬ Typical(mouse, be at computer)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.86
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(mouse, be at computer store)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Salient(mouse, be at research laboratory)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(mouse, be at computer)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Plausible(mouse, be a part of computer)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.49
¬ Typical(mouse, be a part of computer)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.47
Typical(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Typical(mouse, be at research laboratory)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.27
Salient(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.68
Plausible(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.47
¬ Typical(mouse, be at computer lab)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.40
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(rat, be at laboratory)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.34
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(mouse, be at computer lab) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Typical(lizard, be at laboratory)