Paragraph about Chemical equation software

The intuition that, contrary to the *IS* model, the value that
a candidate explanans assigns to an explanandum-outcome should not
matter for the goodness of the explanation it provides can be
motivated in the following way. Consider a genuinely indeterministic
coin which is biased strongly (*p* = 0.9) toward heads when
tossed. Suppose that if it is not tossed the coin has probability of
0.5 of being in either the heads or tails position and that whether or
not the coin is tossed is the only factor that is statistically
relevant to whether it Chemical equation is heads or tails. According to the *IS*
model, if the coin is tossed and comes up heads, we can explain this
outcome by appealing to the fact that the coin was tossed (since under
this condition the probability of heads is high) but if the coin is
tossed and comes up tails we cannot explain this outcome, since its
probability is low . The contrary intuition underlying the *SR*
model is that we understand both outcomes equally well. The fact that
the coin has been tossed is the only factor relevant to either outcome
and that factor is common to both outcomes — once we have cited
the toss (and specified the probability values for heads and tails on
tossing), we left nothing out that influences the outcome. There is,
to be sure, the brute fact Ufology that heads is much more probable than tails
on tossing but this is not a factor in addition to tossing that is
relevant to or influences the outcome — *ex hypothesi*,
there is no such additional factor. Similarly, Salmon argues, if it is
really true that the partition in the example involving quick recovery
from strep is objectively homogenous — if there are no other
factors that are statistically relevant to quick recovery besides
whether the subject has been treated and has a resistant strain - then
once we have specified the probability of quick recovery under all
combinations of these factors, and the combination of factors
possessed by the subject whose recovery (or not, as the case may be)
we want to explain, we have specified all information relevant to
recovery and in this sense fully explained the outcome for the
subject.^{[ 6 ]}