taco bell: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents fast food restaurant
Weight: 0.74
, restaurant
Weight: 0.73
, fast food chain
Weight: 0.72
, mexican food
Weight: 0.70
, food chain
Weight: 0.70
Siblings taco
Weight: 0.38
, burrito
Weight: 0.37
, tamale
Weight: 0.37
, mexican restaurant
Weight: 0.37
, italian restaurant
Weight: 0.37

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00
has quality good 0.96
has quality better 0.90
be bad for environment 0.80
is good business 0.76
has quality questions 0.75

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: 0.91
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.91
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.57
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(mexican food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(mexican food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.13
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.20
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.10
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Plausible(mexican food, has quality bad)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Plausible(mexican food, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 1.00
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Plausible(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.54
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.11
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.47
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.36
¬ Remarkable(mexican food, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.03
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Remarkable(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(mexican food, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(burrito, has quality good)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Remarkable(tamale, 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(fast food restaurant, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.89
Plausible(mexican food, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.62
Plausible(mexican food, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.14
Plausible(fast food restaurant, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad)
0.20
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.03
Plausible(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
Remarkable(tamale, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.78
¬ Plausible(tamale, has quality good)
0.55
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(burrito, has quality good) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Plausible(burrito, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.25
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.89
¬ Salient(taco bell, has quality bad)

Similarity expansion

0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.96
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality good)
0.73
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Salient(taco bell, has quality good)
0.71
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(taco bell, has quality good)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.89
Salient(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.93
¬ Typical(taco bell, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.39
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.36
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)
0.31
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(mexican food, has quality bad)
0.27
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mexican food, has quality good)
0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.76
¬ Typical(tamale, has quality good)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.57
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(burrito, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality bad)
0.46
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.79
¬ Typical(mexican food, has quality bad)
0.44
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.91
¬ Typical(mexican food, has quality good)
0.43
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 0.96
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, has quality good)
0.38
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.93
Typical(taco bell, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.23
¬ Typical(fast food restaurant, be bad for environment)