On the impact of configuration on abstract argumentation automated reasoning

As to the impact of configuring differently structured portfolios of abstract argumentation solvers, we consider the solvers submitted to ICCMA-15, which provided the community with a heterogeneous panorama of approaches for handling abstract argumentation frameworks. A superficial reading of the results of ICCMA-15 is that reduction-based systems (either SAT-based or ASP-based) are always the most efficient. Our investigation, concerning the enumeration of stable and preferred extensions, shows that this is not true in full generality and suggests the areas where the relatively under-developed non-reduction-based systems should focus more to improve their performance. Moreover, it also highlights that the state-of-the-art solvers are very complementary and can be successfully combined in portfolios.