waiter: job

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
job 1.00
has state job 0.93
jobs 0.81

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

0.54
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(worker, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(waiter, job)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.06
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Plausible(worker, has state job)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.17
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.32
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(worker, has state job)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.45
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(bartender, jobs)
0.04
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.33
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, has state job)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.22
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, job)
0.03
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.25
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Remarkable(receptionist, jobs)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.38
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.97
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.61
Plausible(worker, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Plausible(waiter, job)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.59
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.99
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
Remarkable(receptionist, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Plausible(receptionist, job)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
Remarkable(receptionist, has state job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(receptionist, has state job)
0.48
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.98
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
Remarkable(receptionist, jobs) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Plausible(receptionist, jobs)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(bartender, jobs) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(bartender, jobs)

Salient implies Plausible

0.19
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(waiter, job)

Similarity expansion

0.72
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Remarkable(waiter, has state job)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.82
¬ Remarkable(waiter, jobs)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.29
¬ Typical(waiter, jobs)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Salient(waiter, jobs)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Plausible(waiter, jobs)
...

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job)

Typical implies Plausible

0.39
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.44
Plausible(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.33
¬ Typical(waiter, job)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.26
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.54
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(worker, has state job)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(receptionist, job)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(receptionist, jobs)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.81
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Typical(bartender, jobs)
0.06
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Remarkable(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(receptionist, has state job)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.29
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.93
Evidence: 0.33
Typical(waiter, job) ⋁
Evidence: 0.55
¬ Typical(worker, has state job)