# Justifying Answer Sets using Argumentation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.5635 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1411.5635/

## Key facts

- Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2014.

## Built on by (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Argumentative XAI: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.11266/) (2021)
- [Non-flat ABA is an Instance of Bipolar Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.12453/) (2023)
- [exp(ASPc) : Explaining ASP Programs with Choice Atoms and Constraint Rules](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.08292/) (2021)
- [On the Correspondence of Non-flat Assumption-based Argumentation and Logic Programming with Negation as Failure in the Head](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.09415/) (2024)
- [Dialogue-based Explanations for Logical Reasoning using Structured Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11291/) (2025)
- [Generating explanations for answer set programming applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.08963/) (2021)
- [Argumentative Explanations for Pattern-Based Text Classifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10932/) (2022)
- [Explanations for Answer Set Programming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.15879/) (2023)
- [Automated legal reasoning with discretion to act using s(LAW)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.14511/) (2024)
- [On Establishing Robust Consistency in Answer Set Programs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.08157/) (2022)
- [Argumentative Characterizations of (Extended) Disjunctive Logic Programs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.07126/) (2023)
- [An XAI View on Explainable ASP: Methods, Systems, and Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.14764/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

An answer set is a plain set of literals which has no further structure that would explain why certain literals are part of it and why others are not. We show how argumentation theory can help to explain why a literal is or is not contained in a given answer set by defining two justification methods, both of which make use of the correspondence between answer sets of a logic program and stable extensions of the Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) framework constructed from the same logic program. Attack Trees justify a literal in argumentation-theoretic terms, i.e. using arguments and attacks between them, whereas ABA-Based Answer Set Justifications express the same justification structure in logic programming terms, that is using literals and their relationships. Interestingly, an ABA-Based Answer Set Justification corresponds to an admissible fragment of the answer set in question, and an Attack Tree corresponds to an admissible fragment of the stable extension corresponding to this answer set.