national park: be beautiful

from ConceptNet
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents land
Weight: 0.69
, park
Weight: 0.69
, city
Weight: 0.69
, area
Weight: 0.61
Siblings death valley
Weight: 0.69
, beach
Weight: 0.63
, glacier
Weight: 0.61
, great barrier reef
Weight: 0.60
, monument
Weight: 0.59

Related properties

Property Similarity
be beautiful 1.00
be ugly and beautiful 0.88
be nice 0.77
be pleasant 0.77
be scenic 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

0.36
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(city, be ugly and beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(national park, be beautiful)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(city, be ugly and beautiful)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.41
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Remarkable(city, be ugly and beautiful)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
¬ Remarkable(beach, be pleasant)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(beach, be nice)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.40
Plausible(city, be ugly and beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Plausible(national park, be beautiful)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.46
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
Remarkable(beach, be nice) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Plausible(beach, be nice)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.59
Remarkable(beach, be pleasant) ⋁
Evidence: 0.07
¬ Plausible(beach, be pleasant)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.48
¬ Salient(national park, be beautiful)

Similarity expansion

0.52
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(national park, be scenic)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.74
¬ Remarkable(national park, be scenic)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(national park, be scenic)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.76
Evidence: 0.48
Salient(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(national park, be scenic)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.48
Salient(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful)

Typical implies Plausible

0.27
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.30
Plausible(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(national park, be beautiful)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(city, be ugly and beautiful)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Typical(beach, be pleasant)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 0.77
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Typical(beach, be nice)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.64
Typical(national park, be beautiful) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Typical(city, be ugly and beautiful)