Arne Meier

Timon Barlag, Nicolas Fröhlich, Miika Hannula et al.

Dependence logic extends first-order logic with dependence atoms asserting that the value of a variable is determined by the values of certain other variables. The semantics of dependence logic has a second-order character and involves sets of assignments, called teams, instead of individual assignments as in the classical Tarski semantics. Since the model-checking problem is known to be NP-complete even for quantifier-free dependence logic (DQF) formulas, researchers have pursued conditions on formulas that make this problem tractable. In 2010, Jarmo Kontinen introduced the notion of k-coherence for dependence logic formulas, where k is a positive integer. This notion asserts that if the formula is satisfied in a structure by all k-element subteams of a given team, then the given team itself satisfies the formula. It has been proved that k-coherent DQF-formulas have a tame model-checking problem, because such formulas admit a first-order rewriting. In this paper, we investigate the structural and algorithmic aspects of coherence. We show that if a DQF-formula is first-order ewritable, then it is k-coherent for some positive integer k. Thus, for DQF-formulas, coherence is equivalent to first-order rewritability. Furthermore, we show that an analogous result holds for universally quantified dependence logic formulas under a stronger notion of coherence. After this, we focus on the complexity of deciding if a given dependence logic formula is k-coherent. We establish that this decision problem is highly undecidable for arbitrary dependence logic formulas, while for DQF-formulas this problem is co-recursively enumerable. Furthermore, we pinpoint the computational complexity of the coherence problem for propositional dependence logic formulas by showing that this problem is complete for the second level of the exponential hierarchy.

Juha Kontinen, Arne Meier, Kai Sauerwald

This paper establishes and proves representation theorems for cumulative propositional dependence logic and for cumulative propositional logic with team semantics. Cumulative logics are famously given by System C. For propositional dependence logic, we show that System C entailments are exactly captured by cumulative models from Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor. On the other hand, we show that entailment in cumulative propositional logics with team semantics is exactly captured by cumulative and asymmetric models. For the latter, we also obtain equivalence with cumulative logics based on propositional logic with classical semantics. The proofs will be useful for proving representation theorems for other cumulative logics without negation and material implication.

Kai Sauerwald, Juha Kontinen, Arne Meier

This paper establishes and proves complexity results for entailment for cumulative propositional dependence logic and for cumulative propositional logic with team semantics. As recently shown, cumulative logics are famously characterised by System~C and exactly captured by the cumulative models of Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor. This gives rise to the entailment problem via relational models, which is specifically considered here.

Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Yasir Mahmood et al.

Abstract argumentation is a popular toolkit for modeling, evaluating, and comparing arguments. Relationships between arguments are specified in argumentation frameworks (AFs), and conditions are placed on sets (extensions) of arguments that allow AFs to be evaluated. For more expressiveness, AFs are augmented with \emph{acceptance conditions} on directly interacting arguments or a constraint on the admissible sets of arguments, resulting in dialectic frameworks or constrained argumentation frameworks. In this paper, we consider flexible conditions for \emph{rejecting} an argument from an extension, which we call rejection conditions (RCs). On the technical level, we associate each argument with a specific logic program. We analyze the resulting complexity, including the structural parameter treewidth. Rejection AFs are highly expressive, giving rise to natural problems on higher levels of the polynomial hierarchy.

Kai Sauerwald, Arne Meier, Juha Kontinen

This paper considers the complexity and properties of KLM-style preferential reasoning in the setting of propositional logic with team semantics and dependence atoms, also known as propositional dependence logic. Preferential team-based reasoning is shown to be cumulative, yet violates System~P. We give intuitive conditions that fully characterise those cases where preferential propositional dependence logic satisfies System~P. We show that these characterisations do, surprisingly, not carry over to preferential team-based propositional logic. Furthermore, we show how classical entailment and dependence logic entailment can be expressed in terms of non-trivial preferential models. Finally, we present the complexity of preferential team-based reasoning for two natural representations. This includes novel complexity results for classical (non-team-based) preferential reasoning.

Yasir Mahmood, Arne Meier, Johannes Schmidt

Logic-based argumentation is a well-established formalism modelling nonmonotonic reasoning. It has been playing a major role in AI for decades, now. Informally, a set of formulas is the support for a given claim if it is consistent, subset-minimal, and implies the claim. In such a case, the pair of the support and the claim together is called an argument. In this paper, we study the propositional variants of the following three computational tasks studied in argumentation: ARG (exists a support for a given claim with respect to a given set of formulas), ARG-Check (is a given set a support for a given claim), and ARG-Rel (similarly as ARG plus requiring an additionally given formula to be contained in the support). ARG-Check is complete for the complexity class DP, and the other two problems are known to be complete for the second level of the polynomial hierarchy (Parson et al., J. Log. Comput., 2003) and, accordingly, are highly intractable. Analyzing the reason for this intractability, we perform a two-dimensional classification: first, we consider all possible propositional fragments of the problem within Schaefer's framework (STOC 1978), and then study different parameterizations for each of the fragment. We identify a list of reasonable structural parameters (size of the claim, support, knowledge-base) that are connected to the aforementioned decision problems. Eventually, we thoroughly draw a fine border of parameterized intractability for each of the problems showing where the problems are fixed-parameter tractable and when this exactly stops. Surprisingly, several cases are of very high intractability (paraNP and beyond).

Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Arne Meier

In this paper, we consider counting and projected model counting of extensions in abstract argumentation for various semantics. When asking for projected counts we are interested in counting the number of extensions of a given argumentation framework while multiple extensions that are identical when restricted to the projected arguments count as only one projected extension. We establish classical complexity results and parameterized complexity results when the problems are parameterized by treewidth of the undirected argumentation graph. To obtain upper bounds for counting projected extensions, we introduce novel algorithms that exploit small treewidth of the undirected argumentation graph of the input instance by dynamic programming (DP). Our algorithms run in time double or triple exponential in the treewidth depending on the considered semantics. Finally, we take the exponential time hypothesis (ETH) into account and establish lower bounds of bounded treewidth algorithms for counting extensions and projected extension.

Johannes K. Fichte, Arne Meier, Irina Schindler

In this paper, we introduce a notion of backdoors to Reiter's propositional default logic and study structural properties of it. Also we consider the problems of backdoor detection (parameterised by the solution size) as well as backdoor evaluation (parameterised by the size of the given backdoor), for various kinds of target classes (cnf, horn, krom, monotone, identity). We show that backdoor detection is fixed-parameter tractable for the considered target classes, and backdoor evaluation is either fixed-parameter tractable, in para-DP2 , or in para-NP, depending on the target class.