waiter: complain about tips

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents employee
Weight: 0.69
, man
Weight: 0.64
, worker
Weight: 0.63
, job
Weight: 0.62
, restaurant
Weight: 0.59
Siblings bartender
Weight: 0.36
, italian restaurant
Weight: 0.36
, receptionist
Weight: 0.35
, policeman
Weight: 0.35
, seafood restaurant
Weight: 0.35

Related properties

Property Similarity
complain about tips 1.00
get tips 0.93
work for tips 0.92
need tips 0.92
expect tips 0.91
deserve tips 0.87
rely on tips 0.87
demand tips 0.86
entitled to tips 0.86
get tips from credit cards 0.84

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: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Remarkable(bartender, get tips)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.56
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
Remarkable(bartender, get tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.99
¬ Plausible(bartender, get tips)

Salient implies Plausible

0.28
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Salient(waiter, complain about tips)

Similarity expansion

0.79
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.97
¬ Plausible(waiter, get tips)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Plausible(waiter, need tips)
0.78
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(waiter, work for tips)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 0.91
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.98
¬ Plausible(waiter, expect tips)
0.76
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.92
Typical(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.38
¬ Typical(waiter, need tips)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.90
Salient(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(waiter, complain about tips)

Typical implies Plausible

0.47
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.99
Plausible(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.92
¬ Typical(waiter, complain about tips)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(waiter, complain about tips) ⋁
Evidence: 0.86
¬ Typical(bartender, get tips)