A framework with sets of attacking arguments ($\textit{SETAF}$) is an extension of the well-known Dung’s Abstract Argumentation Frameworks ($\mathit{AAF}$s) that allows joint attacks on arguments. In this paper, we provide a translation from Normal Logic Programs ($\textit{NLP}$s) to $\textit{SETAF}$s and vice versa, from $\textit{SETAF}$s to $\textit{NLP}$s. We show that there is pairwise equivalence between their semantics, including the equivalence between $L$-stable and semi-stable semantics. Furthermore, for a class of $\textit{NLP}$s called Redundancy-Free Atomic Logic Programs ($\textit{RFALP}$s), there is also a structural equivalence as these back-and-forth translations are each other’s inverse. Then, we show that $\textit{RFALP}$s are as expressive as $\textit{NLP}$s by transforming any $\textit{NLP}$ into an equivalent $\textit{RFALP}$ through a series of program transformations already known in the literature. We also show that these program transformations are confluent, meaning that every $\textit{NLP}$ will be transformed into a unique $\textit{RFALP}$. The results presented in this paper enhance our understanding that $\textit{NLP}$s and $\textit{SETAF}$s are essentially the same formalism.

Characterizations of semi-stable and stage extensions in terms of two-valued logical models are presented. To this end, the so-called GL-supported and GL-stage models are defined. These two classes of logical models are logic programming counterparts of the notion of range which is an established concept in argumentation semantics.