salad: be expensive in restaurants

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents meal
Weight: 0.71
, accompaniment
Weight: 0.70
, entree
Weight: 0.69
, dish
Weight: 0.64
Siblings potato salad
Weight: 0.82
, fruit salad
Weight: 0.77
, potato
Weight: 0.67
, taco
Weight: 0.65
, red cabbage
Weight: 0.64

Related properties

Property Similarity
be expensive in restaurants 1.00
taste better in restaurants 0.89
taste better at restaurants 0.89
be more expensive than burgers 0.82
be at schools expensive 0.78
is expensive 0.78
cost more than burgers 0.78
be more expensive than meat 0.78
is more expensive 0.77
get to shops 0.77

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

0.35
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(meal, be at schools expensive)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.01
¬ Plausible(meal, be at schools expensive)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.02
¬ Remarkable(meal, be at schools expensive)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.30
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.01
Plausible(meal, be at schools expensive)
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)

Salient implies Plausible

0.26
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)

Similarity expansion

0.69
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.10
¬ Plausible(salad, taste better in restaurants)
0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Plausible(salad, taste better at restaurants)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Salient(salad, taste better in restaurants)
0.67
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Salient(salad, taste better at restaurants)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Remarkable(salad, taste better in restaurants)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.17
¬ Remarkable(salad, taste better at restaurants)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.32
¬ Typical(salad, taste better at restaurants)
0.59
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.89
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(salad, taste better in restaurants)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.27
¬ Plausible(salad, be more expensive than meat)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(salad, be more expensive than meat)
0.49
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(salad, be more expensive than meat)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Remarkable(salad, is expensive)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Remarkable(salad, be more expensive than meat)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Typical(salad, cost more than burgers)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Typical(salad, be more expensive than burgers)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.52
¬ Salient(salad, is expensive)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.48
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Plausible(salad, cost more than burgers)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.47
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Typical(salad, is expensive)
0.30
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Plausible(salad, is expensive)
0.29
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.41
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.64
¬ Plausible(salad, be more expensive than burgers)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.38
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Remarkable(salad, be more expensive than burgers)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.35
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Salient(salad, cost more than burgers)
0.23
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.75
¬ Salient(salad, be more expensive than burgers)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.30
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.11
Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Remarkable(salad, cost more than burgers)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.10
Salient(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)

Typical implies Plausible

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.09
Plausible(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(meal, be at schools expensive)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(salad, be expensive in restaurants)
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Typical(meal, be at schools expensive)