Lhouari Nourine

Anthony Meunier, Lhouari Nourine, Simon Vilmin

Optimizing an implicational base of a closure system consists in turning this implicational base into an equivalent one with premises and conclusions as small as possible. This task is known to be hard in general but tractable for a number of classes of closure systems. In particular, several classes of convex geometries are known to have tractable optimization, while the problem was recently claimed to remain hard in general convex geometries. Continuing this line of research, we give a characterization of the optimum bases of a convex geometry in terms of what we call quasi-closed hypergraphs. We then use this characterization to show that when each quasi-closed hypergraph has disjoint edges, any implicational base of the convex geometry can be optimized in polynomial time with existing minimization and reduction algorithms. Finally, we prove that this property applies to double-shelling, acyclic, affine and acceptant convex geometries, thus unifying the existing results regarding the tractability of optimization for the first three classes.

Mohammed Elaroussi, Lhouari Nourine, Mohammed Said Radjef et al.

This paper deals with the problem of finding the preferred extensions of an argumentation framework by means of a bijection with the naive sets of another framework. First, we consider the case where an argumentation framework is naive-bijective: its naive sets and preferred extensions are equal. Recognizing naive-bijective argumentation frameworks is hard, but we show that it is tractable for frameworks with bounded in-degree. Next, we give a bijection between the preferred extensions of an argumentation framework being admissible-closed (the intersection of two admissible sets is admissible) and the naive sets of another framework on the same set of arguments. On the other hand, we prove that identifying admissible-closed argumentation frameworks is coNP-complete. At last, we introduce the notion of irreducible self-defending sets as those that are not the union of others. It turns out there exists a bijection between the preferred extensions of an argumentation framework and the naive sets of a framework on its irreducible self-defending sets. Consequently, the preferred extensions of argumentation frameworks with some lattice properties can be listed with polynomial delay and polynomial space.