I see that Elisa Freschi resists the idea that arthapatti is inference to the best explanation.
That I think is correct because arthapatti in traditional examples is if anything inference to the only explanation, that is to say the only explanation that will answer in the court of common sense. Plump Devadatta may be a great yogi who is taking his prana directly from sunlight without the necessity of the vulgar medium of food. Of course he could also be a shape shifting alien. ‘The best explanation’ implies a selection but in that pramana you have a simple switch and a reliable result. It may be the ‘atom’ out of which ‘molecular’ abduction is built. Arthapatti is simple and the data which I.B.E. seeks to explain is complex.