I don’t think you’ve given enough information to make a reasonable choice.
If the results of all 20 experiments are consistent with both theories but the second theory would not have been made without the data from the second set of experiments, then it stands to reason that the second theory makes more precise predictions.
If the theories are equally complex and the second makes more precise predictions, then it appears to be a better theory. If the second theory contains a bunch of ad hoc parameters to improve the fit, then it’s likely a worse theory.
But of course the original question does not say that the second theory makes more precise predictions, nor that it would not have been made without the second set of experiments.
I don’t think you’ve given enough information to make a reasonable choice. If the results of all 20 experiments are consistent with both theories but the second theory would not have been made without the data from the second set of experiments, then it stands to reason that the second theory makes more precise predictions.
If the theories are equally complex and the second makes more precise predictions, then it appears to be a better theory. If the second theory contains a bunch of ad hoc parameters to improve the fit, then it’s likely a worse theory.
But of course the original question does not say that the second theory makes more precise predictions, nor that it would not have been made without the second set of experiments.