wine: be served in glasses

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents drink
Weight: 0.64
, beverage
Weight: 0.64
, alcoholic beverage
Weight: 0.64
, indulgence
Weight: 0.63
Siblings red wine
Weight: 0.79
, madeira
Weight: 0.69
, wine cellar
Weight: 0.67
, vermouth
Weight: 0.64
, grape juice
Weight: 0.64

Related properties

Property Similarity
be served in glasses 1.00
be served in different glasses 0.98
be served in sized glasses 0.92
be served in different sized glasses 0.92
be served in glass 0.88
be served in small glass 0.85
be served in large glass 0.85
is glasses shaped 0.84
be served cold 0.82
be served warm 0.80

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

0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Remarkable(red wine, be served in glasses)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Remarkable(red wine, be served in glass)
0.08
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
¬ Remarkable(red wine, be served in large glass)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.55
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Remarkable(red wine, be served in different sized glasses)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
¬ Remarkable(red wine, be served warm)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.59
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
¬ Remarkable(red wine, be served cold)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
Remarkable(red wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.21
¬ Plausible(red wine, be served in glasses)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
Remarkable(red wine, be served in different sized glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.24
¬ Plausible(red wine, be served in different sized glasses)
0.50
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
Remarkable(red wine, be served in glass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.14
¬ Plausible(red wine, be served in glass)
0.40
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.50
Remarkable(red wine, be served in large glass) ⋁
Evidence: 0.53
¬ Plausible(red wine, be served in large glass)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.66
Remarkable(red wine, be served cold) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Plausible(red wine, be served cold)
0.35
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.62
Remarkable(red wine, be served warm) ⋁
Evidence: 0.90
¬ Plausible(red wine, be served warm)

Salient implies Plausible

0.22
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(wine, be served in glasses)

Similarity expansion

0.70
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.20
Typical(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.09
¬ Typical(wine, be served in glass)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.88
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Plausible(wine, be served in glass)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.28
¬ Salient(wine, be served in glass)
0.53
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.61
Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.77
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glass)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.13
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.91
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.28
Salient(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses)

Typical implies Plausible

0.40
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.20
Plausible(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Typical(wine, be served in glasses)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 0.92
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.16
¬ Typical(red wine, be served in different sized glasses)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Typical(red wine, be served in glasses)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.88
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.13
¬ Typical(red wine, be served in glass)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.63
Similarity weight: 0.85
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Typical(red wine, be served in large glass)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.82
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(red wine, be served cold)
0.05
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.42
Similarity weight: 0.80
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Remarkable(wine, be served in glasses) ⋁
Evidence: 0.95
¬ Typical(red wine, be served warm)