Cited by 27Philosophy and History of SciencePhilosophy, Science, and HistoryScience Education and Pedagogy

Scientific explanation: A critical survey

Schurz, Gerhard·1995·Foundations of Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00145406

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schurz, G.
Affiliations
University of Salzburg (AT)
Corresponding author
Schurz, Gerhard
Venue
Foundations of Science
Published
1995-09
Volume
1
Issue
3
Pages
429-465
ISSN
  • 1233-1821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8471
OpenAlex
W1968273337
Cited by
27
References
98
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Foundations of Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy, Science, and History
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
scientific explanation, probabilistic explanation, causality, relevance, homogeneity, prior knowledge, reason-giving, justification, prediction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review