nutrition: is cheaper

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents health
Weight: 0.66
, need
Weight: 0.61
, field
Weight: 0.61
, thing
Weight: 0.60
, department
Weight: 0.59
Siblings obesity
Weight: 0.36
, mental health problem
Weight: 0.35
, vaccination
Weight: 0.34
, bad food
Weight: 0.33
, dog food
Weight: 0.33

Related properties

Property Similarity
is cheaper 1.00
is cheap 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

0.13
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Remarkable(bad food, is cheaper)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
¬ Remarkable(bad food, is cheap)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.60
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
Remarkable(bad food, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Plausible(bad food, is cheaper)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.05
Remarkable(bad food, is cheap) ⋁
Evidence: 0.04
¬ Plausible(bad food, is cheap)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Salient(nutrition, is cheaper)

Similarity expansion

0.61
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Salient(nutrition, is cheap)
0.58
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.69
Remarkable(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(nutrition, is cheap)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.78
Typical(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(nutrition, is cheap)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Plausible(nutrition, is cheap)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Salient(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(nutrition, is cheaper)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.75
Plausible(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(nutrition, is cheaper)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.18
¬ Typical(bad food, is cheaper)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 0.83
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(nutrition, is cheaper) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Typical(bad food, is cheap)