On computing the set of acceptable arguments in abstract argumentation

We investigate the computational problem of determining the set of acceptable arguments in abstract argumentation wrt. credulous and skeptical reasoning under grounded, complete, stable, and preferred semantics. In particular, we investigate the computational complexity of that problem and its verification variant, and develop four SAT-based algorithms for the case of credulous reasoning under complete semantics, two baseline approaches based on iterative acceptability queries and extension enumeration and two optimised algorithms