# On Nested Justification Systems (full version)

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.04541 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.04541/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 4 of its 24 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 May 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Analyzing Semantics of Aggregate Answer Set Programming Using Approximation Fixpoint Theory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.14789/) (2021)
- [Aggregate Semantics for Propositional Answer Set Programs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.08662/) (2021)
- [Exploiting Game Theory for Analysing Justifications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.01609/) (2020)
- [Reactive Multi-Context Systems: Heterogeneous Reasoning in Dynamic Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.03438/) (2016)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Explanations for Answer Set Programming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.15879/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Justification theory is a general framework for the definition of semantics of rule-based languages that has a high explanatory potential. Nested justification systems, first introduced by Denecker et al. (2015), allow for the composition of justification systems. This notion of nesting thus enables the modular definition of semantics of rule-based languages, and increases the representational capacities of justification theory. As we show in this paper, the original semantics for nested justification systems lead to the loss of information relevant for explanations. In view of this problem, we provide an alternative characterization of semantics of nested justification systems and show that this characterization is equivalent to the original semantics. Furthermore, we show how nested justification systems allow representing fixpoint definitions (Hou and Denecker 2009).