Super Hyper Forcing

SuperHyperForcing
Ideas | Approaches | Accessibility | Availability
Dr. Henry Garrett

Report | Exposition | References | Research #22 2022
Abstract
In this research book, there are two research chapters “Extreme SuperHyper- 1
Forcing” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” about some researches on 2
SuperHyperForcing and neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. With researches 3

on the basic properties, the research book starts to make SuperHyperForcing 4
theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing theory more understandable. 5
6
In the first chapter, in this research, new setting is introduced for new 7
SuperHyperNotions, namely, SuperHyperForcing and Neutrosophic SuperHy- 8
perForcing. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them 9

but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, 10
and SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The 11
literature review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the 12
elegancy and the significancy of this research, the comparison between this 13
SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHy- 14
perNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the examples and the 15
instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The applications 16
are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 17
research. The “Cancer’s Recognitions” are the under research to figure out the 18
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case 19
is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of 20
them. Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the 21
group of cells. These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the 22
relations amid them all officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks 23
“SuperHyperGraph” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elec- 24
ted to research about “Cancer’s Recognitions”. Thus these complex and dense 25
SuperHyperModels open up some avenues to research on theoretical segments 26
and “Cancer’s Recognitions”. Some avenues are posed to pursue this research. 27
It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions and some problems. 28
Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then a “SuperHyperForcing” Z(N SHG) for a 29
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum cardinality of 30
a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 31
in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely 32
many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is 33

converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyper- 34
Neighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex; a “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” 35
Zn (N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 36
minimum neutrosophic cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHy- 37
i
Abstract
perVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such 38

that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change 39
rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex 40
if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. 41

in V (G)\S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many 45
applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted 46
to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of 47

a black SuperHyperVertex; a “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” Zn (N SHG) 48
for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum neutro- 49
sophic cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas 50
SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned 51
black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white Super- 52
HyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white 53

SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. Assume a SuperHyper- 54
Graph. Then an “δ−SuperHyperForcing” is a minimal SuperHyperForcing of 55
SuperHyperVertices with minimum cardinality such that either of the following 56
expressions hold for the (neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 57
s ∈ S : |S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ, |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. 58
The first Expression, holds if S is an “δ−SuperHyperOffensive”. And the 59

second Expression, holds if S is an “δ−SuperHyperDefensive”; a“neutrosophic 60
δ−SuperHyperForcing” is a minimal neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing of Su- 61
perHyperVertices with minimum neutrosophic cardinality such that either of 62
the following expressions hold for the neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyper- 63
Neighbors of s ∈ S : |S ∩N (s)|neutrosophic > |S ∩(V \N (s))|neutrosophic +δ, |S ∩ 64
N (s)|neutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|neutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, holds 65

if S is a “neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive”. And the second Expression, 66
holds if S is a “neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive”. It’s useful to define 67
“neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperForcing. Since there’s more ways to get 68
type-results to make SuperHyperForcing more understandable. For the sake of 69
having neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion 70
of “SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 71

are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, 72
there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume 73
a SuperHyperForcing. It’s redefined neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing if the 74
mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, 75
Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic Super- 76
HyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 77
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The Minimum 78
Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The Minimum Values of 79
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The Minimum Values of Its 80
Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The Minimum Values of Its 81
Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce 82
the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on SuperHyperForcing. 83

It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of previous definition in 84
the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperConnectiv- 85
ities until the SuperHyperForcing, then it’s officially called “SuperHyperForcing” 86
but otherwise, it isn’t SuperHyperForcing. There are some instances about the 87
ii
clarifications for the main definition titled “SuperHyperForcing”. These two 88
examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 89
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on SuperHyperForcing. 90
For the sake of having neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, there’s a need to 91

“redefine” the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” and “neutrosophic 92
SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 93
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, 94
a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “neutrosophic SuperHyper- 96
Graph” if the intended Table holds. And SuperHyperForcing are redefined 97

“neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to 98
define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways 99
to get neutrosophic type-results to make neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 100
more understandable. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 101
some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 102
SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 103

SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “neutrosophic SuperHy- 104
perPath”, “neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”, “neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, 105
“neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, 106
and “neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHy- 107
perGraph has “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” where it’s the strongest [the 108
maximum neutrosophic value from all SuperHyperForcing amid the maximum 109
value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperForcing.] SuperHyperFor- 110
cing. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the number 111
of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHy- 112
perGraph. There are some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath 113
if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges 114
with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as 115
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one 116
SuperVertex as intersection amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipart- 117
ite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges 118
and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in 119
common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 120
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi 121
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s 122
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one 123
SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common SuperVertex. The 124
SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific architectures. 125
The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutro- 126
sophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 127

“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and 128
the common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific 129
group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, 130
it’s useful to have some degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality 131
to have more precise SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyper- 132
Model is called “neutrosophic”. In the future research, the foundation will 133
be based on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and the results and the definitions 134
will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the cancer in the 135
long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s 136
called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 137
iii
Abstract
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily 138
identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about 139
the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us 140
to choose another model [it’s said to be neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to 141

have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. There are 142
some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 143
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of 144
the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells 145
could be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, 146
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHy- 147

perWheel). The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperForcing or the 148
strongest SuperHyperForcing in those neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For 149
the longest SuperHyperForcing, called SuperHyperForcing, and the strongest 150
SuperHyperCycle, called neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, some general results 151
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths 152
have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have 153
at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperCycle. There 154
isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperCycle but literarily, it’s the deformation 155
of any SuperHyperCycle. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 156
familiarity with SuperHyperGraph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 157
theory are proposed. 158
Keywords: (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph, (Neutrosophic) SuperHyper- 159
Forcing, Cancer’s Recognitions 160
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 161

162
In the second chapter, in this research, new setting is introduced for new 163
SuperHyperNotions, namely, SuperHyperForcing and Neutrosophic SuperHy- 164
perForcing. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them 165
but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, 166
and SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The 167
literature review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the 168
elegancy and the significancy of this research, the comparison between this 169
SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHy- 170
perNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the examples and the 171
instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The applications 172
are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 173
research. The “Cancer’s Recognitions” are the under research to figure out the 174
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case 175
is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of 176
them. Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the 177
group of cells. These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the 178
relations amid them all officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks 179
“SuperHyperGraph” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elec- 180
ted to research about “Cancer’s Recognitions”. Thus these complex and dense 181

iv

Neighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex; a “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” 191
Zn (N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 192
minimum neutrosophic cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHy- 193
perVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such 194

if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. 197




Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic Super- 232

HyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 233
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The Minimum 234
Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The Minimum Values of 235
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The Minimum Values of Its 236
v
Abstract
Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The Minimum Values of Its 237

Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce 238
the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on SuperHyperForcing. 239
It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of previous definition in 240
the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperConnectiv- 241
ities until the SuperHyperForcing, then it’s officially called “SuperHyperForcing” 242
but otherwise, it isn’t SuperHyperForcing. There are some instances about the 243
clarifications for the main definition titled “SuperHyperForcing”. These two 244
examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 245
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on SuperHyperForcing. 246

“redefine” the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” and “neutrosophic 248
SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 249
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, 250
a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “neutrosophic SuperHyper- 252

Graph” if the intended Table holds. And SuperHyperForcing are redefined 253
“neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to 254
define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways 255
to get neutrosophic type-results to make neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 256
more understandable. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 257
some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 258

with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as 271
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one 272

separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s 278

vi
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of 300
the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells 301
could be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, 302

SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHy- 303
perWheel). The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperForcing or the 304
strongest SuperHyperForcing in those neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For 305
the longest SuperHyperForcing, called SuperHyperForcing, and the strongest 306
SuperHyperCycle, called neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, some general results 307
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths 308



318
The following references are cited by chapters. 319
320
[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyper- 321
Forcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recogni- 322

tions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 323
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 324
325
The links to the contributions of this research book are listed below. 326
327
vii
Abstract
viii
ix
Abstract
[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And

(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic)
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487).
328
Article #99 329

330
Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) 331
SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHy- 332
perGraphs 333
334
@Wordpress: https://drhenrygarrett.wordpress.com/2022/12/29/superhyperforcing-
335
19/ 336
337
@Preprints_org: ?????? 338
339
x
@ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366673729 340
341
@Scribd: https://www.scribd.com/document/617025195 342
343
@Academia: https://www.academia.edu/93968337 344
345
@Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/record/7493849 346
347
348
[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s

Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: ??????).
349
Some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as 350
book in the following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 351
Scholar and has more than 2455 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutro- 352
sophic Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 353
1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research 354
book covers different types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory 355
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. 356
357
358
[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing:

Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United States.
ISBN: 978-1-59973-725-6 (http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf).
359
[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, 360

Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grand- 361
view Heights, Ohio 43212 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-725-6 362

(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf). 363
364
Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed 365
as book in the following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 366
Scholar and has more than 3152 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic 367
Duality” and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing 368

House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This 369
research book presents different types of notions SuperHyperResolving and 370
SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in neutrosophic graph theory 371
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research book has scrutiny 372
on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, simultaneously. 373
It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s done in 374
this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 375
[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL KNOW-

LEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United
States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 (http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf).
376
[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: 377

GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 378
950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 379
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf). 380
xi
Abstract
Background 381
There are some researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 382
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 383
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic Super- 384
HyperGraph” in Ref. [HG1] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step toward the 385
research on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article is published 386
on the journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and the pages 531- 387
561. In this research article, different types of notions like dominating, resolving, 388
coloring, Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) 389

neutrosophic path, zero forcing number, zero forcing neutrosophic- number, 390
independent number, independent neutrosophic-number, clique number, clique 391
neutrosophic-number, matching number, matching neutrosophic-number, girth, 392
neutrosophic girth, 1-zero-forcing number, 1-zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, 393
failed 1-zero-forcing number, failed 1-zero-forcing neutrosophic-number, global- 394
offensive alliance, t-offensive alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, 395

and global-powerful alliance are defined in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 396
SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic Su- 397
perHyperGraph are cases of research. Some results are applied in family of 398
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Thus this research 399
article has concentrated on the vast notions and introducing the majority of 400
notions. 401
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree 402
and neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some 403
classes related to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [HG2] by Henry Garrett 404
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHy- 405
perGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without 406
using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 407

prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Com- 408
puter Science Research (JCTCSR)” with abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp 409
Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 06-14. The research article studies 410
deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic Super- 411
HyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 412
background. 413
In some articles are titled “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Re- 414
cognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” 415
in Ref. [HG3] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances 416
With SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 417
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling 418
of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in 419

Ref. [HG4] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph 420
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 421
Recognitions” in Ref. [HG5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHy- 422
perDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 423
and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in 424
Ref. [HG6] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and Super- 425

HyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 426
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [HG7] by Henry 427
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 428
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutro- 429
xii
sophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [HG8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic 430
Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic 431

SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [HG9] by Henry Gar- 432
rett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 433
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 434
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [HG10] by Henry Garrett 435
(2022), there are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions 436
about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 437

Some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as book 438
in Ref. [HG11] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar 439
and has more than 2455 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 440
Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 441
West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research book 442
covers different types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and 443
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. 444
Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as 445
book in Ref. [HG12] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 446
xiii
Bibliography 456
HG1 [1] Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neut- 457

rosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Sys- 458
tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 459

(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf). 460
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss_journal/vol49/iss1/34). 461
HG2 [2] Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree along- 462
side Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neut- 463
rosophic Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 464
Henry Garrett, “”, Preprints 2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/pre- 465

prints202212.0549.v1). 466
HG3 [3] Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 467
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive Super- 468

HyperAlliances”, Preprints 2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/pre- 469
prints202212.0549.v1). 470
HG4 [4] Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDe- 471

fensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 472
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 473
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 474
2022, 2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 475
HG5 [5] Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 476

SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 477
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 478
HG6 [6] Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees 479

on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 480
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 481
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 482
HG7 [7] Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 483

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory 484
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 485
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 486
xv
Bibliography
HG8 [8] Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperFor- 487

cing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recogni- 488
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 490
HG9 [9] Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyper- 491
Dominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, 492
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 493
HG10 [10] Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study 494
Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 495
(NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 496
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 497
HG11 [11] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E- 498
publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grand- 499
HG12 [12] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL 502
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 503
Miami, Florida 33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 504
1 [13] F. Smarandache, “Extension of HyperGraph to n-SuperHyperGraph and to 506

Plithogenic n-SuperHyperGraph, and Extension of HyperAlgebra to n-ary 507
(Classical-/Neutro-/Anti-) HyperAlgebra”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 508
33 (2020) 290-296. (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3783103). 509
2 [14] M. Akram et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic Hypergraphs”, TWMS J. 510

App. Eng. Math. 8 (1) (2018) 122-135. 511
3 [15] S. Broumi et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic graphs”, Journal of New 512

Theory 10 (2016) 86-101. 513
4 [16] H. Wang et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic sets”, Multispace and 514

Multistructure 4 (2010) 410-413. 515
5 [17] H.T. Nguyen and E.A. Walker, “A First course in fuzzy logic”, CRC 516
Press, 2006. 517
xvi
Bibliography
| Book #63
518
| Title: SuperHyperForcing
519
#Latest_Updates
520
#The_Links
521
Available at Twitter, ResearchGate, Scribd, Academia, Zenodo, LinkedIn

522
– 523
524
#Latest_Updates 525
526
#The_Links 527
528
| Book #63 529
530
|Title: SuperHyperForcing 531

532
| Available at Twitter, ResearchGate, Scribd, Academia, Zenodo, LinkedIn 533
534
– 535
536
| Publisher | 537
(Paperback): ??????
538
(Hardcover): ??????
539
– 540
541
| ISBN | 542
(Paperback): ??????
543
(Hardcover): ??????
544
– 545
546
#Latest_Updates 547
548
#The_Links 549
550
| @ResearchGate: ?????? 551
552
| @Scribd: ?????? 553
554
| @Academia: ?????? 555
556
| @Zenodo: ?????? 557
558
| @Wordpress: ?????? 559
560
561
xvii
Bibliography
In this research book, there are two research chapters “Extreme SuperHyperForcing” and
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” about some researches on SuperHyperForcing and
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing.
562
xviii
Acknowledgements 563
The author is going to express his gratitude and his appreciation about the 564
brains and their hands which are showing the importance of words in the 565
framework of every wisdom, knowledge, arts, and emotions which are streaming 566
in the lines from the words, notions, ideas and approaches to have the material The
567 words of mind and the
and the contents which are only the way to flourish the minds, to grow the minds of words, are too
568
eligible to be in the stage
notions, to advance the ways and to make the stable ways to be amid events 569
of acknowledgements
and storms of minds for surviving from them and making the outstanding 570
experiences about the tools and the ideas to be on the star lines of words and 571
shining like stars, forever. 572
xix
Contents 573
Abstract i 574
Bibliography xv 575
Acknowledgements xix 576
Contents xxi 577
List of Figures xxiii 578
List of Tables xxv 579
1 Extreme SuperHyperForcing 1 580
1.1 Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 581

(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 582
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 583
1.2 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 584
1.3 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 585
1.4 SuperHyperForcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 586
1.5 Results on SuperHyperClasses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 587
1.6 General Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 588
1.7 Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 589
1.8 Open Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 590
1.9 Conclusion and Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 591
Bibliography 113 592
2 Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 115 593
2.1 Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 594

(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 595
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 596
2.2 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 597
2.3 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 598
2.4 Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 599
2.5 Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses . . . . . . . . . . 161 600
2.6 General Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 601
2.7 Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 602
xxi
Contents
2.8 Open Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 603

2.9 Conclusion and Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 604
Bibliography 225 605
xxii
List of Figures 606
1.1 The SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Notions of SuperHyper- 607

Forcing in the Examples (1.4.1) and (2.4.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 608
















xxiii
List of Figures


1.21 A SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing 647
in the Example (1.5.3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 648
1.22 A SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperFor- 649
cing in the Example (1.5.5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 650

1.23 A SuperHyperStar Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing 651
in the Example (1.5.7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 652
1.24 A SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of SuperHyper- 653
Forcing in the Example (1.5.9) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 654
1.25 A SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of SuperHy- 655
perForcing in the Example (1.5.11) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 656

1.26 A SuperHyperWheel Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperFor- 657
cing in the Example (1.5.13) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 658
Forcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 660
perForcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 662
2.1 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of 663
SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 664

2.2 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Notions of 665
2.3 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Notions of 667
2.4 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), Associated 669
to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.8) . . . . 172 670

2.5 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), Associ- 671
ated to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.10) 175 672
2.6 A Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), Associated to 673
the Notions of SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.12) . . . . 178 674
Forcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 676

perForcing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 678
xxiv
List of Tables 679
1.1 The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and 680

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 681
Mentioned in the Definition (2.3.22) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 682

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, 684


SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 109 690
1.5 The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and Su- 691
perHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 109 692
1.6 A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Research 111 693


SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, 698


SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 704
Mentioned in the Example (2.5.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 705

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 707
SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 710

perHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 713
xxv
List of Tables

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMulti- 716
partite N SHM : (V, E), Mentioned in the Example (2.5.10) . . . . 175 717

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 719
N SHW : (V, E), Mentioned in the Example (2.5.12) . . . . . . . . 178 720
SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 221 722
perHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 222 724

2.12 A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Research 224 725
xxvi
CHAPTER 1 726
Extreme SuperHyperForcing 727
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 99th manuscript and I 728
use prefix 99 as number before any labelling for items. 729
730

10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 734
1
1. Extreme SuperHyperForcing
The links to the contributions of this research chapter are listed below. 735
2
736
Article #99 737

738
perGraphs 741
742
743
19/ 744
745
747
3
4
749
751
753
755
756
5
1.1 Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing 757
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 758
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs 759
1.2 Abstract 760
In this research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, 761
SuperHyperForcing and Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Two different types 762
of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and 763
the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on 764
that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented 765
in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy 766
of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 767
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The 768
definitions are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifica- 769
tions are driven with different tools. The applications are figured out to make 770
sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s 771
Recognitions” are the under research to figure out the challenges make sense 772
about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. The cells 773
are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some 774
of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of 775
cells. These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations 776
amid them all officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “Super- 777
HyperGraph” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected 778
to research about “Cancer’s Recognitions”. Thus these complex and dense 779

black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white Su- 793
perHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only 794
white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. Assume a Supe- 795
rHyperGraph. Then a “SuperHyperForcing” Z(N SHG) for a neutrosophic 796
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyper- 797
Set S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S 798
are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applic- 799
ations of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to 800
a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a 801
black SuperHyperVertex; a “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” Zn (N SHG) for 802
a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum neutrosophic 803
6
1.2. Abstract
cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Su- 804

perHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned 805




Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic Su- 830
perHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The 831
Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 832
Minimum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The Minimum 833
Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The Minimum Values 834
of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The Minimum Values 835
of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m going to 836
introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on Super- 837

HyperForcing. It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of 838
previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have 839
all SuperHyperConnectivities until the SuperHyperForcing, then it’s officially 840
called “SuperHyperForcing” but otherwise, it isn’t SuperHyperForcing. There 841
are some instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled “Super- 842
HyperForcing”. These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since 843
there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based 844
on SuperHyperForcing. For the sake of having neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, 845
there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” 846
and “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and the Su- 847
perHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 848
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the 849
values. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “neutrosophic 850
SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And SuperHyperForcing are 851
redefined “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” if the intended Table holds. It’s 852
useful to define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 853
7
more ways to get neutrosophic type-results to make neutrosophic SuperHyper- 854

Forcing more understandable. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There 855
are some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 856

with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as in- 869
tersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one 870
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi sep- 875
arate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s 876

some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the 898
cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could 899
be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, Super- 900
HyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 901
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperForcing or the strongest Su- 902
perHyperForcing in those neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 903
8
1.3. Background
SuperHyperForcing, called SuperHyperForcing, and the strongest SuperHy- 904

perCycle, called neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, some general results are 905
introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths 906
1.3 Background 916


notions. 936

background. 948
9





Motivation and Contributions 991
In this research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of motivations. 992
I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 993
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s 994
attacks. In this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations 995
which in that, the cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or 996
individuals have excessive labels which all are raised from the behaviors to 997
10
1.3. Background
overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the embedded situations, the individuals 998
of cells and the groups of cells could be considered as “new groups”. Thus it 999
motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting more proper 1000
analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 1001
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. 1002
In this SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as 1003
“SuperHyperVertices” and the relations between the individuals of cells and 1004
the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another 1005
motivation for us to do research on this SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s 1006
Recognitions”. Sometimes, the situations get worst. The situation is passed 1007
from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond them. There 1008
are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 1009
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete 1010
data, imprecise data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be 1011
considered on the previous SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s 1012
SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. 1013

The cancer is the disease but the model is going to figure out what’s going 1014
on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is considered and as 1015
the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells are 1016
under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region 1017
are the matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find 1018
some treatments for this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 1019
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” 1020
and both bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has 1021
been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. 1022
In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions 1023
based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the forms of alliances’ 1024
styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally called 1025
“SuperHyperForcing” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix 1026
“SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1027
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the 1028
the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to 1033
choose another model [it’s said to be neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have 1034
convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. There are some 1035
specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some 1036
general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks 1037
and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a neutrosophic 1038
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 1039
SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either 1040
the optimal SuperHyperForcing or the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing in 1041
those neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. 1042
Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two 1043
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 1044
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperCycle. There isn’t any 1045
formation of any SuperHyperCycle but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 1046
SuperHyperCycle. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 1047
11
Question 1.3.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on 1048

them to find the “ amount of SuperHyperForcing” of either individual of cells or 1049
the groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, 1050
the “amount of SuperHyperForcing” based on the fixed groups of cells or the 1051
fixed groups of group of cells? 1052
Question 1.3.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognitions” 1053
in terms of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions 1054
are illustrated? 1055
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled “Supe- 1056
rHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “SuperHy- 1057
perForcing” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” on “SuperHyperGraph” 1058
and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more 1059
motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 1060
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get 1061
some instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of 1062
this research. The general results and some results about some connections are 1063
some avenues to make key point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognitions”, more 1064
understandable and more clear. 1065
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 1066
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, 1067
initial definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1068

are deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are 1069
clarified and illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied 1070
to make sense about what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. 1071
The main definitions and their clarifications alongside some results about new 1072
notions, SuperHyperForcing and neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, are figured 1073
out in sections “SuperHyperForcing” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. 1074

In the sense of tackling on getting results and in order to make sense about 1075
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 1076
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 1077
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled 1078
“Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyper- 1079
Classes”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 1080
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 1081
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Res- 1082
ults on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. 1083
The starter research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding 1084
and closing section of theoretical research are contained in the section “General 1085
Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are 1086
well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the 1087
sections, “General Results”, “SuperHyperForcing”, “Neutrosophic SuperHy- 1088
perForcing”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 1089
SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s done about the 1090
SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and going 1091
to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research 1092
as presented in section, “SuperHyperForcing”. The keyword of this research 1093
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions” with two cases 1094
and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 1095
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyper- 1096
12
1.3. Background
Multipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are 1097

some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this 1098
research in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure 1099
out this research in featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this 1100
research alongside about what’s done in this research to make sense and to get 1101
sense about what’s figured out are included in the section, “Conclusion and 1102
Closing Remarks”. 1103
Preliminaries 1104
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this research, is presented. 1105
Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 1106
Definition 1.3.3 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref.[2],Definition 2.1,p.87).

Let X be a space of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted by x;
then the neutrosophic set A (NS A) is an object having the form
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}
+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a truth-
membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the
condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets 1107
+
of ]− 0, 1 [. 1108
Definition 1.3.4 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref.[5],Definition 6,p.2).

Let X be a space of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted
by x. A single valued neutrosophic set A (SVNS A) is characterized
by truth-membership function TA (x), an indeterminacy-membership function
IA (x), and a falsity-membership function FA (x). For each point x in X,
TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) ∈ [0, 1]. A SVNS A can be written as
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.
Definition 1.3.5. The degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-
membership and falsity-membership of the subset X ⊂ A of the single
valued neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
TA (X) = min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
and FA (X) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 1.3.6. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued neutrosophic set
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 1.3.7 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Definition 1109
3,p.291). 1110
Assume V 0 is a given set. A neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 1111
is an ordered pair S = (V, E), where 1112
13
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets 1113
of V 0 ; 1114
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 1115
1, 2, . . . , n); 1116
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic 1117
subsets of V ; 1118
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 1119
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 1120
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 1121
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 1122
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);

P
1123
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 0
P
0 1124
(ix) and the following conditions hold:
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 . 1125
Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the neutrosophic Supe- 1126
rHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 1127
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of indeterminacy- 1128
membership and the degree of falsity-membership the neutrosophic Super- 1129

HyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 1130
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the de- 1131
gree of indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the 1132
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1133
(NSHE) E. Thus, the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of neutrosophic 1134
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the 1135
sets V and E are crisp sets. 1136
Definition 1.3.8 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1137

(NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Section 4,pp.291-292). 1138
Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = 1139

(V, E). The neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the neutrosophic 1140
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 1141
S = (V, E) could be characterized as follow-up items. 1142
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 1143
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 1144
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 1145
edge; 1146
14
1.3. Background
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 1147
HyperEdge; 1148
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 1149
is called SuperEdge; 1150
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 1151
is called SuperHyperEdge. 1152
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely 1153
diverse types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 1154
Definition 1.3.9 (t-norm). (Ref.[3], Definition 5.1.1, pp.82-83). 1155

A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the 1156
following for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 1157
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 1158
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 1159
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 1160
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 1161

valued neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X} (with
respect to t-norm Tnorm ):
TA (X) = Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 1.3.11. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued neutrosophic
set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 1.3.12. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1162
(NSHG)). 1163
of V 0 ; 1167
1, 2, . . . , n); 1169
subsets of V ; 1171
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 1173
15
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 1174
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 1175
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);

P
1176
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 0
P
0 1177

edge; 1198
HyperEdge; 1200
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to 1205
have some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case 1206
of this SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 1207
Definition 1.3.14. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph 1208

and the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 1209
To get more visions on SuperHyperForcing, the some SuperHyperClasses 1210

are introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperForcing more understandable. 1211
Definition 1.3.15. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 1212

SuperHyperClasses as follows. 1213
16
1.3. Background
(i). It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 1214
two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 1215
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 1216
two given SuperHyperEdges; 1217
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 1218
SuperHyperEdges; 1219
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 1220

amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 1221
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 1222
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 1223

(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 1226

amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHy- 1227
perEdge with any common SuperVertex. 1228
Definition 1.3.16. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHy-

perGraph (NSHG) S. Then a sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
(NSHV) and neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic 1229

SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) 1230
Vs if either of following conditions hold: 1231
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 1232
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 1233
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 1234
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 1235
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1
0
∈ Ei0 ; 1236
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 1237
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 1238
vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
0
1239
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that 1240
Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 1241
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 1243
17
Definition 1.3.17. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths).

Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair
S = (V, E). A neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Vs is sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 1244
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 1245
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called 1246
SuperPath; 1247
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 1248
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called SuperHy- 1249
perPath. 1250
Definition 1.3.18. ((neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing). 1251

Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 1252
(i) a SuperHyperForcing Z(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1253

N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black 1254
SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored 1255
white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications of 1256
“the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black 1257
SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black 1258

SuperHyperVertex; 1259
(ii) a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing Zn (N SHG) for a neutrosophic 1260

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum neutrosophic 1261
cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas 1262
SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is 1263

turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a 1264
white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is 1265
the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. 1266
Definition 1.3.19. ((neutrosophic)δ− SuperHyperForcing). 1267

(i) an δ−SuperHyperForcing is a minimal SuperHyperForcing of Super- 1269
HyperVertices with minimum cardinality such that either of the following 1270
expressions hold for the (neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeigh- 1271
bors of s ∈ S : 1272
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; (1.1)

|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. (1.2)
The Expression (2.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And 1273

the Expression (2.2), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 1274
18
1.3. Background
Table 1.1: The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned
in the Definition (2.3.22)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet

The Values of The SuperVertices The Minimum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The Minimum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The Minimum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The Minimum Values of Its Endpoints
96TBL3
(ii) a neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperForcing is a minimal neutrosophic 1275
SuperHyperForcing of SuperHyperVertices with minimum neutrosophic 1276

cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 1277
neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 1278
|S ∩ N (s)|neutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|neutrosophic + δ; (1.3)

|S ∩ N (s)|neutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|neutrosophic + δ. (1.4)
The Expression (2.3), holds if S is a neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive.

1279
And the Expression (2.4), holds if S is a neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive.
1280

“redefine” the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyper- 1282
Vertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters 1283
of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels 1284
to assign to the values. 1285
96DEF1 Definition 1.3.20. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 1286

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (2.1) holds. 1287
It’s useful to define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since 1288

there’s more ways to get neutrosophic type-results to make neutrosophic 1289
SuperHyperForcing more understandable. 1290
96DEF2 Definition 1.3.21. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 1291
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2.2) holds. Thus Supe- 1292

rHyperPath, SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, Su- 1293
perHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are neutrosophic SuperHy- 1294
perPath, neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, neutrosophic SuperHyper- 1295
Star, neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, neutrosophic SuperHyper- 1296
MultiPartite, and neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2.2) 1297
holds. 1298
It’s useful to define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperForcing. Since 1299

there’s more ways to get type-results to make SuperHyperForcing more 1300
understandable. 1301

“redefine” the notion of “SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and 1303
the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 1304
values. 1306
19

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, Mentioned

96TBL4


97TBL1
96DEF1 Definition 1.3.22. Assume a SuperHyperForcing. It’s redefined neutrosophic 1307

SuperHyperForcing if the Table (2.3) holds. 1308
1.4 SuperHyperForcing 1309
97EXM1 Example 1.4.1. Assume the SuperHyperGraphs in the Figures (1.1), (1.2), 1310
(1.3), (1.4), (1.5), (1.6), (1.7), (1.8), (1.9), (1.10), (1.11), (1.12), (1.13), (1.14), 1311
(1.15), (1.16), (1.17), (1.18), (1.19), and (1.20). 1312
• On the Figure (1.1), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyperForcing, 1313

is up. E1 and E3 are some empty SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1314
a loop SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 1315

the terms of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one SuperHyperEdge, 1316
namely, E4 . The SuperHyperVertex, V3 is isolated means that there’s 1317
no SuperHyperEdge has it as an endpoint. Thus SuperHyperVertex, 1318
V3 , is contained in every given SuperHyperForcing. All the following 1319
SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet 1320
of the SuperHyperForcing. 1321
{V3 , V1 , V2 }
{V3 , V1 , V4 }
{V3 , V2 , V4 }
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V3 , V2 , V4 , V1 }, is a Supe- 1322

rHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in 1323
V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely 1324
20
1.4. SuperHyperForcing

Neighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but it isn’t a SuperHyperForcing. 1327
Since it doesn’t have the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S 1328
of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are 1329

colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applica- 1330
tions of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted 1331
to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor 1332
of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one SuperHyperVertex outside 1333
the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious SuperHyperForcing is 1334
up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing 1335

is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected 1336
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1337

is up. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an 1339
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only 1340

one SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The SuperHyperVertex, V3 is isolated 1341
means that there’s no SuperHyperEdge has it as an endpoint. Thus 1342
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is contained in every given SuperHyperForcing. 1343
All the following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple 1344
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. 1345
{V3 , V1 , V2 }
{V3 , V1 , V4 }
{V3 , V2 , V4 }
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V3 , V2 , V4 , V1 }, is a Supe- 1346




is up. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an 1363
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 1364
only one SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . All the following SuperHyper- 1365
Sets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1366
21
SuperHyperForcing. 1367
{V1 , V2 }
{V1 , V3 }
{V2 , V3 }
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 }, is a Super- 1368
HyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in 1369


neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). Thus all the following Su- 1383
perHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet 1384

of the SuperHyperForcing. 1385
{V1 , V2 }
{V1 , V3 }
{V2 , V3 }
since the SuperHyperSets of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 }, {V1 , V3 }, {V2 ,1386
V3 }
are the SuperHyperSets Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Super- 1387
HyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned 1388
black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white 1389
SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the 1390
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex and they 1391
are SuperHyperForcing. Since they’ve the minimum cardinality 1392
of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHy- 1393
perVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned 1394
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s 1397
only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}. 1398
Thus the obvious SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is up. The obvious simple 1399
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is a SuperHy- 1400
perSet, V \ {v}, excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected 1401
• On the Figure (1.4), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyper- 1403

Forcing, is up. There’s no empty SuperHyperEdge but E3 are 1404
a loop SuperHyperEdge on {F }, and there are some SuperHy- 1405
perEdges, namely, E1 on {H, V1 , V3 }, alongside E2 on {O, H, V4 , V3 } 1406
22
and E4 , E5 on {N, V1 , V2 , V3 , F }. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyper- 1407

Vertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F } is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1408
SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1409
{V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet 1410

S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S 1411
are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many 1412
applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is 1413
converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHy- 1414
perNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s not only one Super- 1415
HyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious 1416

SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1417
SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyper- 1418
Vertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1419
But the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, has 1420
more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. 1421
Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperFor- 1422

cing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 1423
{V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 1424
the SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper- 1425
Vertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black Supe- 1426
rHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored 1427
white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications 1428
of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a 1429
black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of 1430
a black SuperHyperVertex and they are SuperHyperForcing. Since 1431
it’s the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black Supe- 1432
of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to 1435
a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor 1436
of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more than one SuperHy- 1437
perVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }. 1438
Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is up. 1439
The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, 1440

{V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, excludes 1441
only more than one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic Supe- 1442
rHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1443
• On the Figure (1.5), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHy- 1444
perForcing, is up. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor 1445

loop SuperHyperEdge. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVer- 1446
tices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is the simple type- 1447
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of 1448
the SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is 1449
the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyper- 1450
Vertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) 1451

such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications of “the 1452
color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black 1453
SuperHyperVertex. In There’s not only one SuperHyperVertex outside 1455
23
the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing 1456

is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing 1457
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the SuperHyperSet 1459

of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, has 1460
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is the non-obvious simple 1464
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet 1465

of the SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, 1466
is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Super- 1467
SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is 1470
the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex and 1471

they are SuperHyperForcing. Since it’s the minimum cardinality 1472

only more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyper- 1478
Set, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }. Thus the non-obvious 1479
SuperHyperForcing, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is up. 1480
The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperFor- 1481
cing, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is a SuperHyperSet, 1482
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, excludes only more than 1483
one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1484
N SHG : (V, E). 1485

loop SuperHyperEdge. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 1488

{V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is the simple type- 1489
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of the 1490
SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is 1491

of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, 1502
has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Super- 1503
HyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1504
24
SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of 1505

SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, 1506
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHy- 1507
perForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1508

{V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is the SuperHyper- 1509
Set Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in 1510
V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after 1511
finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white Super- 1512
HyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only 1513
white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex and they are 1514

SuperHyperForcing. Since it’s the minimum cardinality of a Su- 1515
perHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 1516
in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after 1517
white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only 1520

more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, 1521
{V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }. Thus the non-obvious 1522
SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is 1523
up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper- 1524
Forcing, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is a SuperHy- 1525
perSet, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, excludes only 1526
more than one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHy- 1527
perGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1528



25


N SHG : (V, E). 1570





26

N SHG : (V, E). 1612


SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is 1618

is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHy- 1634
perForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1635

{V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is the SuperHyper- 1636
Set Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in 1637
V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after 1638


up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper- 1651
27
Forcing, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is a SuperHy- 1652
perSet, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, excludes only 1653





N SHG : (V, E). 1697

is up. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. 1699
The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is the simple 1700
28
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of 1701

the SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is the minimum cardinality 1702
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s 1707
not only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. 1708
Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type- 1709
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes 1710

only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyper- 1711
Graph N SHG : (V, E). But the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 1712
{V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the inten- 1713
ded SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet 1714
of the SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet 1715
of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is the non-obvious simple type- 1716

SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of 1717
the SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black 1718


of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more than one SuperHyper- 1729
Vertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }. Thus the 1730
non-obvious SuperHyperForcing, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is up. The non-obvious 1731
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is 1732
a SuperHyperSet, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, excludes only more than one SuperHy- 1733
perVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1734

The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, 1737
is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The Su- 1738
perHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is 1739


the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperFor- 1746
cing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHy- 1747
perForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in 1748
a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the 1749
29
SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, has 1750

Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper- 1752
Forcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyper- 1753

Vertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is the non-obvious simple type- 1754
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet 1755
of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is the Super- 1756
HyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 1757

perHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVer- 1763
tices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black 1764
after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white Su- 1765
perHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the 1766
Set, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperFor- 1769
cing, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is up. The non-obvious simple type- 1770
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, 1771

is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, excludes only more 1772
than one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyper- 1773
Graph N SHG : (V, E). 1774

The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is the simple 1777
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of 1778
the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is the minimum cardinality 1779
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s 1784
Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type- 1786

{V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the inten- 1790
ded SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet 1791
of the SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet 1792
of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is the non-obvious simple type- 1793
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of 1794

the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black 1795
30


of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more than one SuperHyper- 1806
Vertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }. Thus the 1807
non-obvious SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is up. The non-obvious 1808

simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is 1809
a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, excludes only more than one SuperHy- 1810

The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 }, is the simple type- 1814
SuperHyperVertices, {V1 }, is the minimum cardinality of a Super- 1816
HyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 1817

white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s not 1821
only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus 1822
the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type- 1823

{V1 }, has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Su- 1827
perHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1828
SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of Super- 1829
HyperVertices, {V1 }, is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1830
SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1831

{V1 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas 1832

Set, {V1 }. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing, {V1 }, is up. The 1844
non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, {V1 }, 1845
is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 }, excludes only more than one SuperHyperVertex 1846
in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1847
31

The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is the simple type- 1850

SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is the minimum cardinality of a Su- 1852
many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex 1855
is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHy- 1856

SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVer- 1860
tex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But 1861
the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, has more than 1862
one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the 1863

non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing is up. 1864
To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, 1865
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. 1866
Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is the 1867
SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyper- 1868
Vertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black 1869
are SuperHyperForcing. Since it’s the minimum cardinality of a 1873
SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVer- 1874
tices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after 1875
{V1 , V3 , V6 }. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is up. 1880
The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, 1881

{V1 , V3 , V6 }, is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, excludes only more than 1882
N SHG : (V, E). 1884
• On the Figure (1.16), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyperForcing,

is up. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge.
The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices,
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V6 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V15 , V14 , V13 , V17 , V16 , V19 , V18 , V21 , V20 },
is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The

SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices,
is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHy-

perVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white)
32
such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications of “the
color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black
SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black
SuperHyperVertex. In There’s not only one SuperHyperVertex outside
the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing
is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing
is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the SuperHyperSet
of SuperHyperVertices,
has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet.

Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperFor-
cing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices,
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing.

Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices,
is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Super-

HyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned
black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white
SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex and they
are SuperHyperForcing. Since it’s the minimum cardinality of a
SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVer-
tices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after
finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHy-
perVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white
SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more
than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet,
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V6 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V15 , V14 , V13 , V17 , V16 , V19 , V18 , V21 , V20 }.
Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing,
is up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper-

Forcing,
is a SuperHyperSet,
excludes only more than one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutro- 1885

sophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 1886
33

The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 1889
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V6 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V15 , V14 , V13 , V17 , V16 , V19 , V18 , V21 , V23 , V1 ,
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. The 1890

SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1891
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHy- 1892

perVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) 1893

of SuperHyperVertices, 1902
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. 1903
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },

Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1907
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },


finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHy- 1916
perVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white 1917
34
SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more 1918

than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, 1919
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 }.
Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperForcing, 1920
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
is up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper- 1921

Forcing, 1922
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
is a SuperHyperSet, 1923
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },


{V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 1929

SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 1930
{V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is the minimum cardinality of a Supe- 1931

SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVer- 1939
tex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But 1940
the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, 1941

has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyper- 1942
Set. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the Super- 1943
HyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of Super- 1944
HyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is the non-obvious simple 1945
of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is the Super- 1947

HyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 1948
35

Set, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }. Thus the non-obvious SuperHyperFor- 1960
cing, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is up. The non-obvious simple type- 1961

SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, 1962
is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, excludes only more 1963
than one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyper- 1964
Graph N SHG : (V, E). 1965

{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },


{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
36
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },


{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }.
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
Forcing, 2001
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },


{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },

{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
37



{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },

{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 }.
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
38
Figure 1.1: The SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Notions of SuperHyper-

Forcing in the Examples (1.4.1) and (2.4.1) 97FGR1
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },

Forcing, 2040
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },

Proposition 1.4.2. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2044

N SHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, V \ {v} is a SuperHy- 2045
perForcing. In other words, the most cardinality, the upper sharp bound for 2046
cardinality, of SuperHyperForcing is the cardinality of V \ {v}. 2047
Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 2048

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V is a SuperHyperSet S of 2049
black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored 2050
39


40


41


42


43


44


45


SuperHyperVertex but it isn’t a SuperHyperForcing. Since it doesn’t have 2054
the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices 2055
(whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) 2056
is turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a 2057

the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s 2059
only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}. 2060
Thus the obvious SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is up. The obvious simple 2061
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is a SuperHyperSet, 2062
V \ {v}, excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic 2063
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 2064

N SHG : (V, E). Then the extreme number of SuperHyperForcing has, the 2066
most cardinality, the upper sharp bound for cardinality, is the extreme cardin- 2067
ality of V if there’s a SuperHyperForcing with the most cardinality, the upper 2068
sharp bound for cardinality. 2069
46


47


Consider there’s a SuperHyperForcing with the most cardinality, the upper 2071
sharp bound for cardinality. The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V is 2072

of a black SuperHyperVertex but it isn’t a SuperHyperForcing. Since it 2077
doesn’t have the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black 2078

SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended 2083
SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}. Thus the obvious SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is up. 2084
The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is 2085
a SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}, excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected 2086
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). It implies that extreme number 2087
of SuperHyperForcing has, the most cardinality, the upper sharp bound for 2088
cardinality, is |V | choose |V | − 1. Thus it induces that the extreme number 2089
of SuperHyperForcing has, the most cardinality, the upper sharp bound for 2090
cardinality, is the extreme cardinality of V if there’s a SuperHyperForcing with 2091
the most cardinality, the upper sharp bound for cardinality. 2092
48

N SHG : (V, E). If a SuperHyperEdge has z SuperHyperVertices, then z − 1 2094

number of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any 2095

Let a SuperHyperEdge has z SuperHyperVertices. Consider z − 2 number 2098
of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any given 2099
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black Supe- 2100
rHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G)\S are colored white) such 2101

rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it 2103
is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but there 2104
are two white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no SuperHyperVer- 2105
tex to the SuperHyperSet S does the “the color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have 2106

is turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: 2109
a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is 2110
the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s 2111
49


50
only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the 2112
obvious SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet 2113
of the SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHy- 2114

Thus all the following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple 2116
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. It’s the contradiction to the 2117
SuperHyperSet S is a SuperHyperForcing. Thus any given SuperHyperSet 2118
of the SuperHyperVertices contains the number of those SuperHyperVertices 2119
from that SuperHyperEdge with z SuperHyperVertices less than z − 1 isn’t 2120
a SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a SuperHyperEdge has z SuperHyperVertices, 2121

then z − 1 number of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge 2122
belong to any SuperHyperForcing. 2123

N SHG : (V, E). Every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique SuperHyper- 2125
Vertex outside of SuperHyperForcing. In other words, every SuperHyperEdge 2126

has only one unique white SuperHyperVertex. 2127

Let a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some 2129
numbers of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge excluding 2130
two unique SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of the 2131

SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices 2132
(whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that 2133
V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change 2134
if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex 2136
but there are two white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no 2137
SuperHyperVertex to the SuperHyperSet S does the “the color-change rule”. 2138
So it doesn’t have the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black 2139

SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple 2145
type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes 2146
only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2147
N SHG : (V, E). Thus all the following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices 2148
are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperForcing. It’s the 2149

contradiction to the SuperHyperSet S is a SuperHyperForcing. Thus any 2150
given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices contains the number of those 2151
SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge with some SuperHyperVertices 2152
less than excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a SuperHyperForcing. 2153
Thus if a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding 2154
one unique SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those SuperHyperVertices from 2155
that SuperHyperEdge belong to any SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected 2156
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), every SuperHyperEdge has 2157
only one unique SuperHyperVertex outside of SuperHyperForcing. In other 2158
words, every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique white SuperHyperVertex. 2159
51

N SHG : (V, E). The all exterior SuperHyperVertices belong to any Supe- 2161
rHyperForcing if for any of them, there’s only one interior SuperHyperVertex is 2162
a SuperHyperNeighbor to any of them. 2163


white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the 2171
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but there are 2172
two white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex 2173
to the SuperHyperSet S does the “the color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have 2174
(whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is 2176
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. Consider some 2179
numbers of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge, without any 2180

exclusion on some SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of 2181
the SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices 2182
a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it 2185
is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but it 2186

implies it doesn’t have the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of 2187



In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), the all exterior 2208
52
SuperHyperVertices belong to any SuperHyperForcing if for any of them, 2209

there’s only one interior SuperHyperVertex is a SuperHyperNeighbor to any of 2210
them. 2211
99PRP Proposition 1.4.7. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2212

N SHG : (V, E). The any SuperHyperForcing only contains all interior Super- 2213
HyperVertices and all exterior SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one 2214
SuperHyperNeighbor out. 2215

only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but there are 2224
two white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex 2225
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. Consider some 2231
numbers of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge, without any 2232
exclusion on some SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of 2233
the SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices 2234

a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it 2237
is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but it 2238
implies it doesn’t have the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of 2239



53

In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), the any 2260

SuperHyperForcing only contains all interior SuperHyperVertices and all exterior 2261
SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor out. 2262
Remark 1.4.8. The words “SuperHyperForcing” and “SuperHyperDominating” 2263

refer to the minimum type-style. In other words, they refer to both the minimum 2264
number and the SuperHyperSet with the minimum cardinality. 2265

N SHG : (V, E). A complement of SuperHyperForcing is the SuperHyper- 2267
Dominating. 2268

By applying the Proposition (1.4.7), the results are up. Thus in a connected 2270
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), a complement of SuperHyper- 2271
Forcing is the SuperHyperDominating. 2272
1.5 Results on SuperHyperClasses 2273
Proposition 1.5.1. Assume a connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E). 2274

Then a SuperHyperForcing-style with the maximum SuperHyperCardinality is a 2275
SuperHyperSet of the exterior SuperHyperVertices. 2276
Proposition 1.5.2. Assume a connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E). Then 2277
a SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet of the exterior SuperHyperVertices and 2278
the interior SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior 2279
SuperHyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A SuperHyperForcing 2280

has the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the number of exterior 2281
SuperHyperParts plus one. 2282
Proof. Assume a connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E). Let a Super- 2283
HyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some numbers of those 2284

SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge excluding two unique SuperHy- 2285
perVertices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices. The 2286
SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in 2287
V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many 2288
to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a 2290

black SuperHyperVertex but there are two white SuperHyperNeighbors outside 2291
implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex to the SuperHyperSet S does the “the 2292
color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have the minimum SuperHyperCardinality of a 2293
applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is conver- 2296

ted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a 2297
black SuperHyperVertex. Consider some numbers of those SuperHyperVertices 2298
from that SuperHyperEdge, without any exclusion on some SuperHyperVer- 2299
tices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices. The 2300
54
1.5. Results on SuperHyperClasses
SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 2301

converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeigh- 2304

bor of a black SuperHyperVertex but it implies it doesn’t have the minimum 2305
SuperHyperCardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices 2306
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only 2310

one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvi- 2311
ous SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 2312
SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex 2313
in a connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E). Thus all the following Supe- 2314
rHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 2315
SuperHyperForcing. It’s the contradiction to the SuperHyperSet S is a SuperHy- 2316

perForcing. Thus any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices contains 2317
the number of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge with some 2318
SuperHyperVertices less than excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a 2319
SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices, 2320
then, with excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those Su- 2321
perHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any SuperHyperForcing. 2322

Thus, in a connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E), every SuperHyperEdge 2323
has only one unique SuperHyperVertex outside of SuperHyperForcing. In other 2324
words, every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique white SuperHyperVertex. In 2325
a connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E), the any SuperHyperForcing only 2326
contains all interior SuperHyperVertices and all exterior SuperHyperVertices 2327
where any of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor out. Then a SuperHyperFor- 2328
cing is a SuperHyperSet of the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 2329
SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior Super- 2330
HyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A SuperHyperForcing has 2331
the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the number of exterior 2332
SuperHyperParts plus one. 2333
94EXM18a Example 1.5.3. In the Figure (1.21), the connected SuperHyperPath N SHP : 2334
(V, E), is highlighted and featured. The SuperHyperSet, S = V \ 2335
{V27 , V3 , V7 , V13 , V22 } of the SuperHyperVertices of the connected SuperHy- 2336
perPath N SHP : (V, E), in the SuperHyperModel (1.21), is the SuperHyper- 2337
Forcing. 2338
Proposition 1.5.4. Assume a connected SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E). 2339
Then a SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet of the exterior SuperHyperVer- 2340

tices and the interior SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form 2341
of interior SuperHyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A SuperHyper- 2342
Forcing has the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the number of 2343
exterior SuperHyperParts. 2344
Proof. Assume a connected SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E). Let a Super- 2345
55
Figure 1.21: A SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing

in the Example (1.5.3) 94NHG18a



one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious 2373
56
SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the Su- 2374

perHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in 2375
a connected SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E). Thus all the following Super- 2376
HyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 2377

Thus, in a connected SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E), every SuperHyperEdge 2385
a connected SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E), the any SuperHyperForcing only 2388

SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior Super- 2392
HyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A SuperHyperForcing has 2393
the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the number of exterior 2394
SuperHyperParts. 2395
94EXM19a Example 1.5.5. In the Figure (1.22), the connected SuperHyperCycle N SHC : 2396
(V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained SuperHyperSet, by the 2397
Algorithm in previous result, of the SuperHyperVertices of the connected 2398

SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E), in the SuperHyperModel (1.22), is the 2399
Proposition 1.5.6. Assume a connected SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E). Then 2401
a SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet of the exterior SuperHyperVertices and 2402
the interior SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior 2403
SuperHyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A SuperHyperForcing has 2404
the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the cardinality of the second 2405
SuperHyperPart plus one. 2406
Proof. Assume a connected SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E). Let a Super- 2407


57
Figure 1.22: A SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperFor-

cing in the Example (1.5.5) 94NHG19a



one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvi- 2435
ous SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 2436

SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex 2437
in a connected SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E). Thus all the following Supe- 2438
58
Figure 1.23: A SuperHyperStar Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing

in the Example (1.5.7) 94NHG20a
Thus, in a connected SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E), every SuperHyperEdge 2447

a connected SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E), the any SuperHyperForcing only 2450
SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior SuperHy- 2454
perVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A SuperHyperForcing has the 2455
number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the cardinality of the second 2456
SuperHyperPart plus one. 2457
94EXM20a Example 1.5.7. In the Figure (1.23), the connected SuperHyperStar N SHS : 2458
(V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained SuperHyperSet, by the 2459
Algorithm in previous result, of the SuperHyperVertices of the connected 2460
SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E), in the SuperHyperModel (1.23), is the 2461
Proposition 1.5.8. Assume a connected SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E). 2463

Forcing has the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the cardinality 2467
of the first SuperHyperPart plus the second SuperHyperPart. 2468
59
Proof. Assume a connected SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E). Let a Supe- 2469
rHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some numbers of those 2470





SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the Supe- 2498
rHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a 2499
connected SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E). Thus all the following Supe- 2500

then, with excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those 2507
SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any SuperHyper- 2508

Forcing. Thus, in a connected SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), every 2509
SuperHyperEdge has only one unique SuperHyperVertex outside of SuperHy- 2510
perForcing. In other words, every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique white 2511
SuperHyperVertex. In a connected SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), the 2512
any SuperHyperForcing only contains all interior SuperHyperVertices and all 2513
exterior SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor 2514

out. Then a SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet of the exterior SuperHy- 2515
perVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in 2516
the form of interior SuperHyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge. A 2517
SuperHyperForcing has the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the 2518
60
Figure 1.24: A SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of SuperHyper-

Forcing in the Example (1.5.9) 94NHG21a
cardinality of the first SuperHyperPart plus the second SuperHyperPart. 2519
94EXM21a Example 1.5.9. In the Figure (1.24), the connected SuperHyperBipartite 2520
N SHB : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained SuperHyperSet, by 2521
the Algorithm in previous result, of the SuperHyperVertices of the connected 2522
SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), in the SuperHyperModel (1.24), is the 2523

Proposition 1.5.10. Assume a connected SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : 2525
(V, E). Then a SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet of the exterior Super- 2526

HyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in 2527
SuperHyperForcing has the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus the 2529
number of all the the summation on the cardinality of the SuperHyperParts. 2530
Proof. Assume a connected SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E). Let a Su- 2531
perHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some numbers of those 2532


61



SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the Supe- 2560
rHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a 2561
connected SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E). Thus all the following Su- 2562
perHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 2563

SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any SuperHyperFor- 2570

cing. Thus, in a connected SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), every 2571
SuperHyperVertex. In a connected SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), 2574
the any SuperHyperForcing only contains all interior SuperHyperVertices and 2575
all exterior SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor 2576
number of all the the summation on the cardinality of the SuperHyperParts. 2581
94EXM22a Example 1.5.11. In the Figure (1.25), the connected SuperHyperMultipartite 2582
N SHM : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained SuperHyperSet, by 2583
SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), in the SuperHyperModel (1.25), is 2585
the SuperHyperForcing. 2586
Proposition 1.5.12. Assume a connected SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E). 2587

62
Figure 1.25: A SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of SuperHy-

perForcing in the Example (1.5.11) 94NHG22a
Forcing has the number of all the SuperHyperVertices minus the number of all 2591
the SuperHyperEdges. 2592
Proof. Assume a connected SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E). Let a Supe- 2593
rHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some numbers of those 2594



63
SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the Su- 2622
perHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in 2623
a connected SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E). Thus all the following Supe- 2624

SuperHyperVertices less than excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, isn’t 2629
a SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVer- 2630
tices, then, with excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, the all number of 2631
those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any SuperHy- 2632
perForcing. Thus, in a connected SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), every 2633

SuperHyperVertex. In a connected SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), the 2636
any SuperHyperForcing only contains all interior SuperHyperVertices and all 2637
exterior SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor 2638

number of all the SuperHyperEdges. 2643
94EXM23a Example 1.5.13. In the Figure (1.26), the connected SuperHyperWheel 2644
N SHW : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained SuperHyperSet, by 2645
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), in the SuperHyperModel (1.26), is the 2647

1.6 General Results 2649
For the SuperHyperForcing, and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, some 2650

general results are introduced. 2651
Remark 1.6.1. Let remind that the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is 2652
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 2653
Corollary 1.6.2. Assume SuperHyperForcing. Then 2654
N eutrosophic SuperHyperF orcing =

{theSuperHyperF orcingof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperDef ensiveSuperHyper
Alliances|neutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperF orcing. }
Where σi is the unary operation on the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHy- 2655

perGraph to assign the determinacy, the indeterminacy and the neutrality, for 2656
i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 2657
64
1.6. General Results
Figure 1.26: A SuperHyperWheel Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperFor-

cing in the Example (1.5.13) 94NHG23a
Corollary 1.6.3. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical 2658

letter of the alphabet. Then the notion of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing and 2659
SuperHyperForcing coincide. 2660

letter of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is 2662
a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing if and only if it’s a SuperHyperForcing. 2663

a strongest SuperHyperCycle if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperCycle. 2666
Corollary 1.6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a neutrosophic SuperHyper- 2667

Graph on the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its neutrosophic 2668
SuperHyperForcing is its SuperHyperForcing and reversely. 2669
Corollary 1.6.7. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, 2670

SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyper- 2671
Wheel) on the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its neutrosophic 2672
Corollary 1.6.8. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its neutro- 2674

sophic SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperForcing 2675
isn’t well-defined. 2676
Graph. Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined if and only 2678
if its SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined. 2679

Wheel). Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined if and only 2682
65

sophic SuperHyperForcing is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperForcing 2685
is well-defined. 2686

Graph. Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is well-defined if and only if 2688
its SuperHyperForcing is well-defined. 2689

Wheel). Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is well-defined if and only if 2692

Proposition 1.6.14. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 2694

Then V is 2695
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2696
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2697
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2698
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2699
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2700
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2701
Proof. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Consider 2702

V. All SuperHyperMembers of V have at least one SuperHyperNeighbor inside 2703
the SuperHyperSet more than SuperHyperNeighbor out of SuperHyperSet. 2704
Thus, 2705
(i). V is the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 2706
statements are equivalent. 2707
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(ii). V is the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 2708

following statements are equivalent. 2709
∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
66
(iii). V is the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since 2710

the following statements are equivalent. 2711
∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iv). V is the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 2712

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
(v). V is the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 2714
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
(vi). V is connected δ-dual SuperHyperForcing since the following statements 2716
are equivalent. 2717
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
2718
Proposition 1.6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic SuperHyper- 2719
Graph. Then ∅ is 2720
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2721
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2722
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2723
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2724
67
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2725
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2726
∅. All SuperHyperMembers of ∅ have no SuperHyperNeighbor inside the 2728

SuperHyperSet less than SuperHyperNeighbor out of SuperHyperSet. Thus, 2729
(i). ∅ is the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 2730
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |N (a) ∩ ∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(ii). ∅ is the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 2732
∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iii). ∅ is the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 2734
∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iv). ∅ is the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 2736
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(v). ∅ is the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 2738
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
68
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(vi). ∅ is the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 2740
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
2742

Then an independent SuperHyperSet is 2744
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2747

S. All SuperHyperMembers of S have no SuperHyperNeighbor inside the Supe- 2752
rHyperSet less than SuperHyperNeighbor out of SuperHyperSet. Thus, 2753
(i). An independent SuperHyperSet is the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 2754
Forcing since the following statements are equivalent. 2755
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |N (a)| ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(ii). An independent SuperHyperSet is the strong SuperHyperDefensive 2756
SuperHyperForcing since the following statements are equivalent. 2757
∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Ns (a)| ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
69
(iii). An independent SuperHyperSet is the connected SuperHyperDefensive 2758

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Nc (a)| ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iv). An independent SuperHyperSet is the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 2760

perForcing since the following statements are equivalent. 2761
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(v). An independent SuperHyperSet is the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive 2762

∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(vi). An independent SuperHyperSet is the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive 2764

∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
2766
Proposition 1.6.17. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 2767
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 2768

minimal 2769
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2770
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2771
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2772
70
(iv) : O(N SHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2773
(v) : strong O(N SHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2774
(vi) : connected O(N SHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2775
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices 2776
coincide. 2777
Proof. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 2778

SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. 2779
(i). Consider one segment is out of S which is SuperHyperDefensive Super- 2780

HyperForcing. This segment has 2t SuperHyperNeighbors in S, i.e, Suppose 2781
xii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ S such that yii=1,2,...,t , zii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t ). By it’s the 2782
exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide and 2783
it’s SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperCycle, |N (xii=1,2,...,t )| = |N (yii=1,2,...,t )| = 2784
|N (zii=1,2,...,t )| = 2t. Thus 2785
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ S| <
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| <
|{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \ {xii=1,2,...,t } isn’t SuperHyperDe- 2786
fensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperCycle. 2787
Consider one segment, with two segments related to the SuperHyperLeaves as 2788
exceptions, is out of S which is SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. This 2789
segment has 2t SuperHyperNeighbors in S, i.e, Suppose xii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ S such 2790
that yii=1,2,...,t , zii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t ). By it’s the exterior SuperHyperVer- 2791
tices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide and it’s SuperHyperUniform 2792
SuperHyperPath, |N (xii=1,2,...,t )| = |N (yii=1,2,...,t )| = |N (zii=1,2,...,t )| = 2t. Thus 2793
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| <
|{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.
fensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperPath. 2795
71
(ii), (iii) are obvious by (i). 2796

(iv). By (i), |V | is minimal and it’s a SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2797
Thus it’s |V |-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2798
(v), (vi) are obvious by (iv). 2799
Proposition 1.6.18. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2800

which is a SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a minimal 2801
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2802
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2803
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2804
(iv) : O(N SHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2805
(v) : strong O(N SHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2806
(vi) : connected O(N SHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2807

coincide. 2809
Proof. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform Super- 2810

HyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. 2811
xii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ S such that yii=1,2,...,t , zii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t ). 2814
By it’s the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices 2815
coincide and it’s SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel, |N (xii=1,2,...,t )| = 2816

|N (yii=1,2,...,t )| = |N (zii=1,2,...,t )| = 3t. Thus 2817
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t ) ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 ,
|N (yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t )) ∩ S| <
|N (yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t )) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t )) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
|{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 , z10 , z20 , . . . , zt0 }| < |{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 2t − 1 < t − 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \ {xii=1,2,...,t } is SuperHyperDefensive 2818
SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. 2819

(iv). By (i), |V | is minimal and it is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 2821
Forcing. Thus it’s a dual |V |-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2822
72

SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. Then the 2825
number of 2826
(i) : the SuperHyperForcing; 2827
(ii) : the SuperHyperForcing; 2828
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperForcing; 2829
(iv) : the O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 2830
(v) : the strong O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 2831
(vi) : the connected O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing. 2832
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 2833
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 2834


|N (zii=1,2,...,t )| = 2t. Thus 2842
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| < |{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.

73
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| <
|{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.


SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 2858
(i) : the dual SuperHyperForcing; 2859
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperForcing; 2860
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperForcing; 2861
(iv) : the dual O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 2862
(v) : the strong dual O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 2863
(vi) : the connected dual O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing. 2864

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
74

∃yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t ) ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1
, |N (yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t )) ∩ S| <
|{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 , z10 , z20 , . . . , zt0 }| < |{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 2t − 1 < t − 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \{xii=1,2,...,t } isn’t a dual SuperHyper- 2875
Defensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. 2876

(iv). By (i), |V | is minimal and it’s a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 2878
Forcing. Thus it isn’t an |V |-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2879
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyper- 2882

Bipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a SuperHyperSet 2883
contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the number 2884
of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 2885
O(N SHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2889
O(N SHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2890
O(N SHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2891
Proof. (i). Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is SuperHy- 2892

perDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has either n2 or one 2893
SuperHyperNeighbors in S. If the SuperHyperVertex is non-SuperHyperCenter, 2894

then 2895
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
If the SuperHyperVertex is SuperHyperCenter, then 2896
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 2897
SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperStar. 2898
Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is SuperHyperDefensive 2899
75
SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has at most n

2 SuperHyperNeighbors 2900
in S. 2901
n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 2902
perForcing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperBipartite which isn’t a 2903
SuperHyperStar. 2904
Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is SuperHyperDefens- 2905
ive SuperHyperForcing and they’re chosen from different SuperHyperParts, 2906
equally or almost equally as possible. A SuperHyperVertex has at most n2 2907

SuperHyperNeighbors in S. 2908
n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
perForcing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite which is 2910
neither a SuperHyperStar nor SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperBipartite. 2911
O(N SHG)
+1
(iv). By (i), {xi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2913
O(N SHG)
Thus it’s 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2914

contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges 2919
plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart is a 2920
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2924
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2925
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2926
Proof. (i). Consider the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 2927
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest 2928
SuperHyperPart are in S which is SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A 2929
SuperHyperVertex has either n − 1, 1 or zero SuperHyperNeighbors in S. If the 2930
SuperHyperVertex is in S, then 2931
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
76
∀a ∈ S, 0 < 1.
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 2932

cing in a given SuperHyperStar. 2933
Consider the half of multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges 2934
plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart are in S 2935
which is SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has 2936
no SuperHyperNeighbor in S. 2937
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 0 < δ.
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 2938

Forcing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperBipartite which isn’t a 2939

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 0 < δ.

cing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite which is neither 2946
a SuperHyperStar nor SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperBipartite. 2947

(iv). By (i), S is a SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Thus it’s an 2949
δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2950

Bipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the number 2954
of 2955
O(N SHG)
O(N SHG)
O(N SHG)
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] 2962
the half of multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one 2963
of all the SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the 2964
interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 2965
77

then 2969
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has at most n2 SuperHyperNeighbors 2974
in S. 2975
n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2

n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2

O(N SHG)
+1
(iv). By (i), {xi }i=1
2
O(N SHG)
The number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which 2991

is a dual 2992
78
(iv) : 1-SuperHyperForcing; 2996
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 2997
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 2998
Proof. (i). Consider some SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 2999
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. These SuperHyperVertex-type have 3000
some SuperHyperNeighbors in S but no SuperHyperNeighbor out of S. Thus 3001
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
SuperHyperForcing and number of connected component is |V − S|. 3003

(iv). By (i), S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Thus it’s a 3005
dual 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3006

Then the number is at most O(N SHG) and the neutrosophic number is at most 3009
On (N SHG). 3010

Thus, 3014
V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 3015
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
79
V is connected a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 3019

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
V is a dual δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 3021

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
V is a dual strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 3023

∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
V is a dual connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 3025

∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
Thus V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing and V is the biggest 3027

SuperHyperSet in N SHG : (V, E). Then the number is at most O(N SHG : 3028
(V, E)) and the neutrosophic number is at most On (N SHG : (V, E)). 3029
which is SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the 3031

neutrosophic number is min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting 3032
t>
2
of dual 3033
80
(iv) : ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3037
(v) : strong ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

(vi) : connected ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3039
Proof. (i). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 3040
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has n half 3041
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefens- 3043
ive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraph. 3044
Thus the number is O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the neutrosophic number is 3045
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual SuperHy- 3046
t>
2
perDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3047
(ii). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 3048
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual strong SuperHyperDefens- 3051
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual strong Su- 3054
t>
2
perHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3055
(iii). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 3056
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual connected SuperHyperDefens- 3059
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual connected 3062
t>
2
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3063
(iv). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 3064
81

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual ( O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1)- 3067
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperComplete 3068
SuperHyperGraph. Thus the number is O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the neutrosophic 3069
number is min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 3070
t>
2
( O(N SHG:(V,E))
(v). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 3072
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual strong ( O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1)- 3075
t>
2
strong ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

(vi). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 3080
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual connected ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)- 3083
t>
2
connected ( O(N SHG:(V,E))


which is ∅. The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 3089
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 3090
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3094
82

(i). ∅ is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 3100
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |N (a) ∩ ∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent Super- 3102
HyperSet in the setting of a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3103
(ii). ∅ is a dual strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 3104
∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent SuperHy- 3106
perSet in the setting of a dual strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3107

(iii). ∅ is a dual connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 3108
∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 3110

SuperHyperSet in the setting of a dual connected SuperHyperDefensive 3111
(iv). ∅ is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 3113
83
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3116
(v). ∅ is a dual strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 3117
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 3120
Forcing. 3121
(vi). ∅ is a dual connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 3122
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual connected 0-offensive SuperHyperDefensive 3125

which is SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 3128
which is SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 3130

O(N SHG : (V, E)) and the neutrosophic number is On (N SHG : (V, E)), in 3131
the setting of a dual 3132
(iv) : O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3136
84
(v) : strong O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3137
(vi) : connected O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3138
Proof. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 3139

SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. 3140
(i). Consider one SuperHyperVertex is out of S which is a dual SuperHyperDe- 3141
fensive SuperHyperForcing. This SuperHyperVertex has one SuperHyperNeigh- 3142
bor in S, i.e, suppose x ∈ V \ S such that y, z ∈ N (x). By it’s SuperHyperCycle, 3143

|N (x)| = |N (y)| = |N (z)| = 2. Thus 3144
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ (V \ (V \ {x}))| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ {x})| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |{z}| < |{x})| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 1 < 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \{x} isn’t a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3145
SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperCycle. 3146

Consider one SuperHyperVertex is out of S which is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3147
SuperHyperForcing. This SuperHyperVertex has one SuperHyperNeighbor in 3148
S, i.e, Suppose x ∈ V \ S such that y, z ∈ N (x). By it’s SuperHyperPath, 3149
|N (x)| = |N (y)| = |N (z)| = 2. Thus 3150
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ (V \ (V \ {x}))| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ {x})| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |{z}| < |{x})| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 1 < 1.
SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperPath. 3152
S, i.e, Suppose x ∈ V \ S such that y, z ∈ N (x). By it’s SuperHyperWheel, 3155
|N (x)| = |N (y)| = |N (z)| = 2. Thus 3156
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ (V \ (V \ {x}))| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ {x})| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |{z}| < |{x})| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 1 < 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \ {x} isn’t a dual SuperHyperDe- 3157
fensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperWheel. 3158
85

(iv). By (i), V is minimal and it’s a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 3160
cing. Thus it’s a dual O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 3161
Forcing. 3162
Thus the number is O(N SHG : (V, E)) and the neutrosophic number is 3164
On (N SHG : (V, E)), in the setting of all types of a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3165

which is SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyper- 3168
MultiPartite. The number is O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the neutrosophic number 3169
is min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 3170
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(N SHG:(V,E))




perDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has at most n half Supe- 3178
rHyperNeighbors in S. If the SuperHyperVertex is the non-SuperHyperCenter, 3179
then 3180
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
If the SuperHyperVertex is the SuperHyperCenter, then 3181
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
perForcing in a given SuperHyperStar. 3183
Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is a dual SuperHyper- 3184

Defensive SuperHyperForcing. 3185
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

δ δ
∀a ∈ S, >n− .
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 3186
Forcing in a given complete SuperHyperBipartite which isn’t a SuperHyperStar. 3187
Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is a dual SuperHyperDe- 3188
fensive SuperHyperForcing and they are chosen from different SuperHyperParts, 3189
86
equally or almost equally as possible. A SuperHyperVertex in S has δ half 3190

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

δ δ
∀a ∈ S, >n− .
2 2
3192
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive Super- 3193
HyperForcing in a given complete SuperHyperMultipartite which is neither a 3194
SuperHyperStar nor complete SuperHyperBipartite. 3195

O(N SHG:(V,E))
+1
(iv). By (i), {xi }i=1 2
is minimal and it’s a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3197
SuperHyperForcing. Thus it’s a dual O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1-SuperHyperDefensive 3198

min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of all dual SuperHyper- 3202
t>
2
Forcing. 3203
Proposition 1.6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the 3204

N SHGs : (V, E) neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type 3205
SuperHyperClass which the result is obtained for the individuals. Then the 3206
results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific 3207
SuperHyperClasses of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 3208
Proof. There are neither SuperHyperConditions nor SuperHyperRestrictions 3209

on the SuperHyperVertices. Thus the SuperHyperResults on individuals, 3210
N SHGs : (V, E), are extended to the SuperHyperResults on SuperHyperFamily, 3211
N SHF : (V, E). 3212
Proposition 1.6.32. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic Super- 3213
HyperGraph. If S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then 3214

∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 3215
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 3216
(ii) vx ∈ E. 3217
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 3218
Consider v ∈ V \ S. Since S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, 3219
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S, v ∈ Ns (x).
87
(ii). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 3220

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : v ∈ Ns (x)
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E, µ(vx) = σ(v) ∧ σ(x).
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E.
3222
Proposition 1.6.33. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic SuperHyper- 3223
Graph. If S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then 3224
(i) S is SuperHyperDominating set; 3225
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 3226

either 3229
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S, v ∈ Ns (x)
or 3230
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : v ∈ Ns (x)
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E, µ(vx) = σ(v) ∧ σ(x)
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E.
It implies S is SuperHyperDominating SuperHyperSet. 3231

either 3234
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S, v ∈ Ns (x)
or 3235
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : v ∈ Ns (x)
88
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E.
Thus every SuperHyperVertex v ∈ V \ S, has at least one SuperHyperNeighbor 3236

in S. The only case is about the relation amid SuperHyperVertices in S in 3237
the terms of SuperHyperNeighbors. It implies there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is 3238
SuperHyperChromatic number. 3239

Graph. Then 3241
(i) Γ ≤ O; 3242
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 3243
Let S = V. 3245
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ V, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ V )|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ ∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > 0
It implies V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. For all Supe- 3246

rHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S, S ⊆ V. Thus for all SuperHyperSets of 3247
SuperHyperVertices S, |S| ≤ |V |. It implies for all SuperHyperSets of Super- 3248
HyperVertices S, |S| ≤ O. So for all SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices 3249
S, Γ ≤ O. 3250
(ii). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Let 3251

S = V. 3252
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ V, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ V )|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ ∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > 0
It implies V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. For all Su- 3253

perHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S, S ⊆ V. Thus for all 3254
SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ 3255
Σv∈V Σ3i=1 σi (v). It implies for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyper- 3256
Vertices S, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ On . So for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic 3257

SuperHyperVertices S, Γs ≤ On . 3258

Graph which is connected. Then 3260
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 3261
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 3262
89

Let S = V − {x} where x is arbitrary and x ∈ V. 3264
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ V − {x}, |Ns (v) ∩ (V − {x})| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ (V − {x}))|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |Ns (x) ∩ {x}|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |∅|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > 0
It implies V − {x} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. For 3265

all SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S = 6 V, S ⊆ V − {x}. Thus for all 3266
SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S = 6 V, |S| ≤ |V − {x}|. It implies 3267
for all SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S 6= V, |S| ≤ O − 1. So for all 3268

SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S, Γ ≤ O − 1. 3269
S = V − {x} where x is arbitrary and x ∈ V. 3271
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |Ns (x) ∩ {x}|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |∅|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > 0

all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S 6= V, S ⊆ V − 3273
{x}. Thus for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S 6= 3274
V, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ Σv∈V −{x} Σ3i=1 σi (v). It implies for all SuperHyperSets of 3275
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S 6= V, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 3276

So for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S, Γs ≤ 3277
On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 3278
Proposition 1.6.36. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 3279
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3280

SuperHyperForcing; 3281
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 3282
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 3283
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } 3284

are only a dual SuperHyperForcing. 3285
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an odd SuperHyperPath. Let S = 3286

{v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all vi , vj ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }, vi vj 6∈ E and 3287
vi , vj ∈ V. 3288
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
90
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 })|
It implies S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3289

perForcing. If S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } − {vi } where vi ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }, 3290
then 3291
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } − {vi } where vi ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } isn’t a dual Super- 3292
HyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual 3293
(ii) and (iii) are trivial. 3295
(iv). By (i), S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive Super- 3296
HyperForcing. Thus it’s enough to show that S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } is a 3297

dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is 3298
an odd SuperHyperPath. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all vi , vj ∈ 3299
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, vi vj 6∈ E and vi , vj ∈ V. 3300
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 > 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 3303
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } − {vi } where vi ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } isn’t a dual 3304

SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } is 3305
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3306
Proposition 1.6.37. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 3307
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 3308

Forcing; 3309
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 3310

{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 3311
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 3312
91
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are 3313
only dual SuperHyperForcing. 3314
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an even SuperHyperPath. Let S = 3315

{v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } where for all vi , vj ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, vi vj 6∈ E and vi , vj ∈ V. 3316
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn })|
It implies S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 3317
cing. If S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } − {vi } where vi ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, then 3318
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } − {vi } where vi ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } isn’t a dual SuperHy- 3319

perDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual 3320
(iv). By (i), S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3323
perForcing. Thus it’s enough to show that S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } is a 3324
dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) 3325

is an even SuperHyperPath. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all 3326
vi , vj ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, vi vj 6∈ E and vi , vj ∈ V. 3327
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 3330
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

Proposition 1.6.38. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperCycle. Then 3334
92
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3335

(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 3337

{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 3338
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 3339
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are 3340

Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an even SuperHyperCycle. Let 3342

S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } where for all vi , vj ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, vi vj 6∈ E and 3343
vi , vj ∈ V. 3344
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn })|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

is an even SuperHyperCycle. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all 3354
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|
then 3358
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
93

Proposition 1.6.39. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperCycle. Then 3362

(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 3366
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } 3367

are only dual SuperHyperForcing. 3368
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an odd SuperHyperCycle. Let S = 3369

vi , vj ∈ V. 3371
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 3374
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

(iv). By (i), S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive Supe- 3379
rHyperForcing. Thus it’s enough to show that S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } is 3380
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) 3381
is an odd SuperHyperCycle. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all 3382
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|
94

then 3386
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

Proposition 1.6.40. Let N SHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 3390
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual minimal SuperHyperForcing; 3391
(ii) Γ = 1; 3392
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 3393
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperForcing. 3394
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperStar. 3395
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|
It implies S = {c} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. If 3396

S = {c} − {c} = ∅, then 3397
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 = 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 6> 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So S = {c} − {c} = ∅ isn’t a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It 3398

induces S = {c} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3399
(iv). By (i), S = {c} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3401
Thus it’s enough to show that S ⊆ S 0 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3402
SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperStar. Let S ⊆ S 0 . 3403
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
It implies S 0 ⊆ S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3404
95
Proposition 1.6.41. Let N SHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 3405
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a 3406
dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3407
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 3408
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 3409
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only 3410
a dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3411
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperWheel. Let S = 3412

6+3(i−1)≤n
{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 . There are either 3413
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 > 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
or 3414
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 3 > 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
6+3(i−1)≤n
It implies S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a 3415
dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. If S 0 = {v1 , v3 } ∪ 3416

6+3(i−1)≤n
{v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 − {z} where z ∈ S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ 3417
6+3(i−1)≤n
{v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 , then There are either 3418
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 < 2 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|

∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | < |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
or 3419
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|

∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
6+3(i−1)≤n
So S 0 = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 − {z} where 3420
6+3(i−1)≤n
z ∈ S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 isn’t a dual Su- 3421
perHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ 3422
6+3(i−1)≤n
{v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive 3423
(ii), (iii) and (iv) are obvious. 3425
Proposition 1.6.42. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 3426
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3427
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 3429
96
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 3430
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3431
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an odd SuperHyperComplete. Let 3433

bn
2 c+1
S = {vi }i=1 . Thus 3434
n n
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = b c + 1 > b c − 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1
It implies S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. If 3435
n
b c+1 bn
2 c+1
S = {vi }i=1 − {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
0 2
, then 3436
n n
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = b c = b c = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1 b n c+1
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
isn’t a dual SuperHyperDe- 3437
bn
2 c+1
fensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDe- 3438
fensive SuperHyperForcing. 3439
Proposition 1.6.43. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. 3441
Then 3442
bnc
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3443
perForcing; 3444
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 3445
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} bnc

2
; 3446
S={vi }i=1
bnc
2
is only a dual minimal SuperHyperDe- 3447
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an even SuperHyperComplete. Let 3449

bn
2c
S = {vi }i=1 . Thus 3450
n n
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = b c > b c − 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
bnc
2
n
b c bn
2c
0 2
, then 3452
n n
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = b c − 1 
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
97
bnc bnc
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
isn’t a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3453
bn2c
SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a dual minimal SuperHyperDe- 3454
Proposition 1.6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of 3457
neutrosophic SuperHyperStars with common neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 3458

SuperHyperSet. Then 3459
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 3460

SuperHyperForcing for N SHF; 3461
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 3462
(iii) Γs = Σm
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E);
3
3463
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 3464

SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 3465
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|
It implies S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 3467

cing for N SHF : (V, E). If S = {c} − {c} = ∅, then 3468
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 = 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 6> 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So S = {c} − {c} = ∅ isn’t a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for 3469

N SHF : (V, E). It induces S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual minimal SuperHyper- 3470
Defensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 3471

(iv). By (i), S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3473
perForcing for N SHF : (V, E). Thus it’s enough to show that S ⊆ S 0 is a 3474
dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). Suppose 3475
N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperStar. Let S ⊆ S 0 . 3476
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
It implies S 0 ⊆ S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for 3477

N SHF : (V, E). 3478
98
Proposition 1.6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 3479

SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common neutrosophic SuperHy- 3480
perVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 3481
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive 3482
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 3484

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 3485
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual minimal SuperHyper- 3486
Forcing for N SHF : (V, E). 3487
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is odd SuperHyperComplete. Let S = 3488

bn
2 c+1
{vi }i=1 . Thus 3489
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing 3490
bn
2 c+1 bn
2 c+1
for N SHF : (V, E). If S = {vi }i=1
0
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1 , then 3491
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1 b n c+1
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
bn
2 c+1
fensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a 3493
dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 3494
Proposition 1.6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 3496

bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3499
perForcing for N SHF : (V, E); 3500
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 3501

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 3502
S={vi }i=1
bnc
2
are only dual minimal SuperHyperForcing 3503
for N SHF : (V, E). 3504
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is even SuperHyperComplete. Let 3505

bn
2c
S = {vi }i=1 . Thus 3506
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
99
bnc
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for 3507
bn
2c bn
2c
N SHF : (V, E). If S = {vi }i=1
0
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
bnc bnc
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
bn
2c
SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a dual 3510
minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 3511


Graph. Then following statements hold; 3514
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is 3515

an t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then S is an s- 3516
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3517
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a 3518

dual t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then S is a dual s- 3519

Consider a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an t-SuperHyperDefensive 3522
SuperHyperForcing. Then 3523
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t ≤ s;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < s.
Thus S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3524

(ii). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Con- 3525
sider a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual t-SuperHyperDefensive 3526
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t ≥ s;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > s.
Thus S is a dual s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3528

(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices 3531

is an t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then S is an s- 3532
SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperForcing; 3533

SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperForcing. 3536
100

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t ≤ t + 2 ≤ s;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < s.
Thus S is an (t + 2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. By S 3540

is an s−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing and S is a dual (s + 3541
2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 3542

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t ≥ s > s − 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > s − 2.
Thus S is an (s − 2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. By S 3547

is an (s − 2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing and S is a dual 3548
s−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, S is an s−SuperHyperPowerful 3549
Proposition 1.6.49. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform- 3551

strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements hold; 3552
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b 2r c + 1, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 3555

2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 3556
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is an r- 3557

(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 3559

r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3560
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong- 3561

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 3562
r r
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < b c + 1 − (b c − 1);
2 2
r r
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < b c + 1 − (b c − 1) < 2;
2 2
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.
101
Thus S is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3563

(ii). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong- 3564
r r
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > b c + 1 − (b c − 1);
2 2
r r
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > b c + 1 − (b c − 1) > 2;
2 2
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.
Thus S is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3566

(iii). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong- 3567
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r − 0 = r;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r.
Thus S is an r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3569

(iv). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong- 3570
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r − 0 = r;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r.
Thus S is a dual r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3572
Proposition 1.6.50. Let N SHG : (V, E) is a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform- 3573

(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b 2r c + 1 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 3577

(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a)∩V \S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 3579

(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual r- 3581


∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

r r
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 = b c + 1 − (b c − 1);
2 2
r r
2 2
r r
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = b c + 1, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = b c − 1.
2 2
102

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 3586
HyperForcing. Then 3587
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

r r
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 = b c + 1 − (b c − 1);
2 2
r r
2 2
r r
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = b c + 1, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S) = b c − 1.
2 2
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and an r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 3589
cing. 3590
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r = r − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = r, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and a dual r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3592
perForcing. Then 3593
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r = r − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = r, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
3594

strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperComplete. Then 3596
following statements hold; 3597
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b O−1

2 c + 1 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 3600
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)- 3602

(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual (O − 1)- 3604


neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and an 2- SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 3607
103
Forcing. Then 3608
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 3613
HyperForcing. 3614
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 = O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = O − 1, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 = O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = O − 1, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
3618

(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b O−1

2 c + 1, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 3624
104
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is (O − 1)- 3626


(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3629

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperComplete. Then 3631
O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 − 0 = O − 1;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1.
Thus S is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3638

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 − 0 = O − 1;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1.
Thus S is a dual (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3641

strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperCycle. Then fol- 3643
lowing statements hold; 3644
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if N SHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 3645

(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 3647

105
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a)∩V \S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 3649

(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 3651

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 3654
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| < 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 3657
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| > 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S) = 0.

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 3660
HyperForcing. 3661
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| < 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is a dual r-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 3663
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| > 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
3665

(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then N SHG : (V, E) is an 2- 3669

106
1.7. Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 3671

(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is an 2- 3673


2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 3676

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperCycle. Then 3678
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.
1.7 Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions 3689
on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is considered and as the 3691
consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells are under 3692
attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are 3693
the matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some 3694
treatments for this disease. 3695
In the following, some steps are devised on this disease. 3696
107

Forcing 94NHG21b
Step 1. (Definition) The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 3697
Step 2. (Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 3698
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 3699
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be 3700
easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and 3701
neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; 3702
this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be neutrosophic 3703
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened 3704
and what’s done. 3705
Step 3. (Model) There are some specific models, which are well-known and 3706
they’ve got the names, and some general models. The moves and the 3707
traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated 3708
groups of cells could be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(- 3709
/SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyper- 3710
Multipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the SuperHy- 3711
perForcing or the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing in those neutrosophic 3712
SuperHyperModels. 3713
Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 3714
SuperHyperModel 3715
Step 4. (Solution) In the Figure (2.7), the SuperHyperBipartite is highlighted 3716

and featured. 3717
By using the Figure (2.7) and the Table (2.10), the neutrosophic 3718
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 3719
108

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite

94TBL21b

perForcing 94NHG22b

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite

94TBL22b
Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 3720
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel 3721
Step 4. (Solution) In the Figure (2.8), the SuperHyperMultipartite is high- 3722

lighted and featured. 3723
By using the Figure (2.8) and the Table (2.11), the neutrosophic Super- 3724
HyperMultipartite is obtained. 3725
109
1.8 Open Problems 3726
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 3727
The SuperHyperForcing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing are defined 3728
on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 3729
Question 1.8.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on 3730
Cancer’s recognitions? 3731
Question 1.8.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperFor- 3732

cing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing? 3733
Question 1.8.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyper- 3734
Models to compute them? 3735
Question 1.8.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 3736
SuperHyperForcing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing? 3737
Problem 1.8.5. The SuperHyperForcing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 3738

cing do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on 3739
SuperHyperForcing, are there else? 3740
Problem 1.8.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 3741
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 3742
Problem 1.8.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 3743
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 3744
1.9 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 3745
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The 3746
drawbacks of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages 3747
of this research are highlighted. 3748
This research uses some approaches to make neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3749
more understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined 3750
on the SuperHyperForcing. For that sake in the second definition, the main 3751
definition of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position 3752

of the alphabets. Based on the new definition for the neutrosophic SuperHy- 3753
perGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, finds 3754
the convenient background to implement some results based on that. Some 3755
SuperHyperClasses and some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases 3756
of this research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of 3757
the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s 3758
Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHy- 3759
perForcing, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. 3760
Some general results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperForcing and 3761
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The clarifications, instances and literat- 3762
ure reviews have taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature 3763
reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the results. The Supe- 3764
rHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels 3765
on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this 3766
research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 3767
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel 3768
110
1.9. Conclusion and Closing Remarks
proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of 3769

the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 3770
and the architecture are formally called “SuperHyperForcing” in the themes of 3771
jargons and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the 3772
embedded styles to figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In
Table 1.6: A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Research 96tbl
Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperForcing
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
3773
the Table (2.12), some limitations and advantages of this research are pointed 3774
out. 3775
111
Bibliography 3776

tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 3779


prints202212.0549.v1). 3786

prints202212.0549.v1). 3790

2022, 2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3795


10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3802

10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3806
113
Bibliography

10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3810
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3817

33 (2020) 290-296. (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3783103). 3829

App. Eng. Math. 8 (1) (2018) 122-135. 3831

Theory 10 (2016) 86-101. 3833

Multistructure 4 (2010) 410-413. 3835
Press, 2006. 3837
114
CHAPTER 2 3838
Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 3839
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 99th manuscript and I 3840
use prefix 99 as number before any labelling for items. 3841
3842

10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3846
115
2. Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing
The links to the contributions of this research chapter are listed below. 3847
116
3848
Article #99 3849

3850
perGraphs 3853
3854
3855
19/ 3856
3857
3859
117
118
3861
3863
3865
3867
3868
119
2.1 Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing 3869
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3870
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs 3871
2.2 Abstract 3872
In this research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, 3873
SuperHyperForcing and Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Two different types 3874
of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and 3875
the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on 3876
that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented 3877
in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy 3878
of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 3879
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The 3880
definitions are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifica- 3881
tions are driven with different tools. The applications are figured out to make 3882
sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s 3883
Recognitions” are the under research to figure out the challenges make sense 3884
about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. The cells 3885
are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some 3886
of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of 3887
cells. These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations 3888
amid them all officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “Super- 3889
HyperGraph” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected 3890
to research about “Cancer’s Recognitions”. Thus these complex and dense 3891

white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. Assume a Supe- 3907
rHyperGraph. Then a “SuperHyperForcing” Z(N SHG) for a neutrosophic 3908
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyper- 3909
black SuperHyperVertex; a “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” Zn (N SHG) for 3914
a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum neutrosophic 3915
120
2.2. Abstract
cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Su- 3916

perHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned 3917




Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic Su- 3942
perHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The 3943
Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 3944
Minimum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The Minimum 3945
Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The Minimum Values 3946
of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The Minimum Values 3947
of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m going to 3948
introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on Super- 3949

HyperForcing. It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of 3950
previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have 3951
all SuperHyperConnectivities until the SuperHyperForcing, then it’s officially 3952
called “SuperHyperForcing” but otherwise, it isn’t SuperHyperForcing. There 3953
are some instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled “Super- 3954
HyperForcing”. These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since 3955
there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based 3956
on SuperHyperForcing. For the sake of having neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, 3957
there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” 3958
and “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and the Su- 3959
perHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 3960
values. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “neutrosophic 3962
SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And SuperHyperForcing are 3963
redefined “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” if the intended Table holds. It’s 3964
useful to define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 3965
121
more ways to get neutrosophic type-results to make neutrosophic SuperHyper- 3966

Forcing more understandable. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There 3967
are some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 3968

with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as in- 3981
tersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one 3982
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi sep- 3987
arate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s 3988

some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the 4010
cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could 4011
be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, Super- 4012
HyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 4013
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperForcing or the strongest Su- 4014
perHyperForcing in those neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 4015
122
2.3. Background
SuperHyperForcing, called SuperHyperForcing, and the strongest SuperHy- 4016

perCycle, called neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, some general results are 4017
introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths 4018
2.3 Background 4028


notions. 4048

background. 4060
123





Motivation and Contributions 4103
In this research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of motivations. 4104
I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 4105
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s 4106
attacks. In this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations 4107
which in that, the cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or 4108
individuals have excessive labels which all are raised from the behaviors to 4109
124
2.3. Background
overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the embedded situations, the individuals 4110
of cells and the groups of cells could be considered as “new groups”. Thus it 4111
motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting more proper 4112
analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 4113
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. 4114
In this SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as 4115
“SuperHyperVertices” and the relations between the individuals of cells and 4116
the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another 4117
motivation for us to do research on this SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s 4118
Recognitions”. Sometimes, the situations get worst. The situation is passed 4119
from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond them. There 4120
are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 4121
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete 4122
data, imprecise data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be 4123
considered on the previous SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s 4124
SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. 4125

on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is considered and as 4127
the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells are 4128
under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region 4129
are the matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find 4130
some treatments for this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 4131
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” 4132
and both bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has 4133
been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. 4134
In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions 4135
based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the forms of alliances’ 4136
styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally called 4137
“SuperHyperForcing” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix 4138
“SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 4139
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the 4140
the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to 4145
choose another model [it’s said to be neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have 4146
convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. There are some 4147
specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some 4148
general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks 4149
and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a neutrosophic 4150
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 4151
SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either 4152
the optimal SuperHyperForcing or the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing in 4153
those neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. 4154
Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two 4155
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 4156
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperCycle. There isn’t any 4157
formation of any SuperHyperCycle but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 4158
SuperHyperCycle. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 4159
125
Question 2.3.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on 4160

them to find the “ amount of SuperHyperForcing” of either individual of cells or 4161
the groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, 4162
the “amount of SuperHyperForcing” based on the fixed groups of cells or the 4163
fixed groups of group of cells? 4164
Question 2.3.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognitions” 4165
in terms of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions 4166
are illustrated? 4167
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled “Supe- 4168
rHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “SuperHy- 4169
perForcing” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” on “SuperHyperGraph” 4170
and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more 4171
motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 4172
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get 4173
some instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of 4174
this research. The general results and some results about some connections are 4175
some avenues to make key point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognitions”, more 4176
understandable and more clear. 4177
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 4178
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, 4179
initial definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 4180

are deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are 4181
clarified and illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied 4182
to make sense about what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. 4183
The main definitions and their clarifications alongside some results about new 4184
notions, SuperHyperForcing and neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, are figured 4185
out in sections “SuperHyperForcing” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. 4186

In the sense of tackling on getting results and in order to make sense about 4187
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 4188
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 4189
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled 4190
“Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyper- 4191
Classes”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 4192
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 4193
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Res- 4194
ults on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. 4195
The starter research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding 4196
and closing section of theoretical research are contained in the section “General 4197
Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are 4198
well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the 4199
sections, “General Results”, “SuperHyperForcing”, “Neutrosophic SuperHy- 4200
perForcing”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 4201
SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s done about the 4202
SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and going 4203
to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research 4204
as presented in section, “SuperHyperForcing”. The keyword of this research 4205
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions” with two cases 4206
and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 4207
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyper- 4208
126
2.3. Background
Multipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are 4209

some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this 4210
research in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure 4211
out this research in featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this 4212
research alongside about what’s done in this research to make sense and to get 4213
sense about what’s figured out are included in the section, “Conclusion and 4214
Closing Remarks”. 4215
Preliminaries 4216
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this research, is presented. 4217
Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 4218
Definition 2.3.3 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref.[2],Definition 2.1,p.87).

Let X be a space of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted by x;
then the neutrosophic set A (NS A) is an object having the form
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}
+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a truth-
membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the
condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets 4219
+
of ]− 0, 1 [. 4220
Definition 2.3.4 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref.[5],Definition 6,p.2).

Let X be a space of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted
by x. A single valued neutrosophic set A (SVNS A) is characterized
by truth-membership function TA (x), an indeterminacy-membership function
IA (x), and a falsity-membership function FA (x). For each point x in X,
TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) ∈ [0, 1]. A SVNS A can be written as
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.
valued neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
TA (X) = min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
and FA (X) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 2.3.6. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued neutrosophic set
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 2.3.7 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref.[4],Definition 4221
3,p.291). 4222
127
of V 0 ; 4226
1, 2, . . . , n); 4228
subsets of V ; 4230
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 4232
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 4233
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 4234
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);

P
4235
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 0
P
0 4236
(ix) and the following conditions hold:
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 . 4237



edge; 4258
128
2.3. Background
HyperEdge; 4260
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely 4265
diverse types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 4266
Definition 2.3.9 (t-norm). (Ref.[3], Definition 5.1.1, pp.82-83). 4267

A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the 4268
following for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 4269
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 4270
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 4271
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 4272
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 4273

valued neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X} (with
respect to t-norm Tnorm ):
TA (X) = Tnorm [TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = Tnorm [IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 2.3.11. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued neutrosophic
set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
Definition 2.3.12. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 4274
(NSHG)). 4275
of V 0 ; 4279
1, 2, . . . , n); 4281
subsets of V ; 4283
0}, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 4285
129
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 4286
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 4287
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n);

P
4288
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 0
P
0 4289

edge; 4310
HyperEdge; 4312
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to 4317
have some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case 4318
of this SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 4319
Definition 2.3.14. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph 4320

and the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 4321
To get more visions on SuperHyperForcing, the some SuperHyperClasses 4322

are introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperForcing more understandable. 4323
Definition 2.3.15. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 4324

SuperHyperClasses as follows. 4325
130
2.3. Background
(i). It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 4326
two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 4327
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 4328
two given SuperHyperEdges; 4329
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 4330
SuperHyperEdges; 4331
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 4332

amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 4333
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 4335

(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 4338

amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHy- 4339
perEdge with any common SuperVertex. 4340
Definition 2.3.16. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHy-

perGraph (NSHG) S. Then a sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
(NSHV) and neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic 4341

SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) 4342
Vs if either of following conditions hold: 4343
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 4344
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 4345
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 4346
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 4347
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1
0
∈ Ei0 ; 4348
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 4349
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ;
0
4351
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that 4352
Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 4353
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 4355
131
Definition 2.3.17. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths).

Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair
S = (V, E). A neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
Vs is sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 4356
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 4357
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called 4358
SuperPath; 4359
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 4360
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called SuperHy- 4361
perPath. 4362
Definition 2.3.18. ((neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing). 4363

(i) a SuperHyperForcing Z(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 4365

N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black 4366

SuperHyperVertex; 4371
(ii) a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing Zn (N SHG) for a neutrosophic 4372

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the minimum neutrosophic 4373
cardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas 4374

the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. 4378
Definition 2.3.19. ((neutrosophic)δ− SuperHyperForcing). 4379

(i) an δ−SuperHyperForcing is a minimal SuperHyperForcing of Super- 4381
HyperVertices with minimum cardinality such that either of the following 4382
expressions hold for the (neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeigh- 4383
bors of s ∈ S : 4384
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; (2.1)

|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. (2.2)
The Expression (2.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And 4385

the Expression (2.2), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 4386
132
2.3. Background


96TBL3
(ii) a neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperForcing is a minimal neutrosophic 4387
SuperHyperForcing of SuperHyperVertices with minimum neutrosophic 4388

cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 4389
neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 4390
|S ∩ N (s)|neutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|neutrosophic + δ; (2.3)

|S ∩ N (s)|neutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|neutrosophic + δ. (2.4)
The Expression (2.3), holds if S is a neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive.

4391
And the Expression (2.4), holds if S is a neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive.
4392

“redefine” the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyper- 4394
Vertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters 4395
of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels 4396
to assign to the values. 4397
96DEF1 Definition 2.3.20. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 4398

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (2.1) holds. 4399
It’s useful to define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since 4400

there’s more ways to get neutrosophic type-results to make neutrosophic 4401
SuperHyperForcing more understandable. 4402
96DEF2 Definition 2.3.21. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 4403
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2.2) holds. Thus Supe- 4404

rHyperPath, SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, Su- 4405
perHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are neutrosophic SuperHy- 4406
perPath, neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, neutrosophic SuperHyper- 4407
Star, neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, neutrosophic SuperHyper- 4408
MultiPartite, and neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2.2) 4409
holds. 4410
It’s useful to define “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperForcing. Since 4411

there’s more ways to get type-results to make SuperHyperForcing more 4412
understandable. 4413

“redefine” the notion of “SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and 4415
the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 4416
values. 4418
133

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, Mentioned

96TBL4


97TBL1
96DEF1 Definition 2.3.22. Assume a SuperHyperForcing. It’s redefined neutrosophic 4419

SuperHyperForcing if the Table (2.3) holds. 4420
2.4 Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 4421
97EXM2 Example 2.4.1. Assume the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs in the Figures 4422
(1.1), (1.2), (1.3), (1.4), (1.5), (1.6), (1.7), (1.8), (1.9), (1.10), (1.11), (1.12), 4423
(1.13), (1.14), (1.15), (1.16), (1.17), (1.18), (1.19), and (1.20). 4424
• On the Figure (1.1), the neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, neut- 4425

rosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 , V2 , V3 } is the neutrosophic 4426
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The details 4427
are followed by the upcoming statements. E1 and E3 are some empty 4428
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Su- 4429
perHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only 4430
one SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The SuperHyperVertex, V3 is isolated 4431
means that there’s no SuperHyperEdge has it as an endpoint. Thus 4432
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is contained in every given neutrosophic SuperHy- 4433
perForcing. All the following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are 4434

the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4435
{V3 , V1 , V2 }
{V3 , V1 , V4 }
{V3 , V2 , V4 }
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V3 , V2 , V4 , V1 }, is a 4436

SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyper- 4437
Vertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned 4438
134
2.4. Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing
black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a 4439

white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if 4440
it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVer- 4441
tex but it isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since it doesn’t 4442

have the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Su- 4443
Neighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one SuperHyperVer- 4448

tex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious neutrosophic 4449
SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 4450
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only 4451
N SHG : (V, E). 4453
• On the Figure (1.2), the neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, 4454

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 , V2 , V3 } is the 4455
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4456
The details are followed by the upcoming statements. E1 , E2 and E3 4457
are some empty SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an SuperHyperEdge. Thus 4458
in the terms of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one SuperHyperEdge, 4459

namely, E4 . The SuperHyperVertex, V3 is isolated means that there’s 4460
no SuperHyperEdge has it as an endpoint. Thus SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 4461
is contained in every given neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. All the 4462
following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type- 4463
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4464
{V3 , V1 , V2 }
{V3 , V1 , V4 }
{V3 , V2 , V4 }
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V3 , V2 , V4 , V1 }, is a 4465
SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyper- 4466

tex but it isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since it doesn’t 4471
have the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Su- 4472

Neighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one SuperHyperVer- 4477
tex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious neutrosophic 4478
SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 4479
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only 4480
N SHG : (V, E). 4482
135

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 , V2 } is the neutrosophic 4484
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The details 4485
are followed by the upcoming statements. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty 4486
SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms 4487
of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 4488
All the following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple 4489
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4490
{V1 , V2 }
{V1 , V3 }
{V2 , V3 }
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 }, is a Su- 4491

after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white 4494
the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but 4496
it isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since it doesn’t have 4497
the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Super- 4498

obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple 4505

type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHy- 4506
perSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic 4507
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). Thus all the following SuperHyper- 4508
Sets of SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 4509
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4510
{V1 , V2 }
{V1 , V3 }
{V2 , V3 }
since the SuperHyperSets of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 }, {V1 , V3 }, {V2 ,4511

V3 }
are the SuperHyperSets Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Su- 4512
perHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is 4513
turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: 4514
a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex 4515
if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVer- 4516
tex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since they’ve 4517
136
SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one 4523

SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}. Thus 4524
the obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is up. The obvious 4525
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, 4526

V \ {v}, is a SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}, excludes only one SuperHyperVertex 4527
in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 4528

rosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F } is the 4530
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 4531

cing. The details are followed by the upcoming statements. There’s 4532
no empty SuperHyperEdge but E3 are a loop SuperHyperEdge on {F }, 4533
and there are some SuperHyperEdges, namely, E1 on {H, V1 , V3 }, along- 4534
side E2 on {O, H, V4 , V3 } and E4 , E5 on {N, V1 , V2 , V3 , F }. The Supe- 4535
rHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F } is the simple 4536
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The 4537

SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is 4538

white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s 4544
Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvi- 4546
ous simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 4547
is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connec- 4548
ted neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the Super- 4549
HyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, has more than 4550
non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper- 4552
Forcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 4553
{V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 4554
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the Su- 4555

perHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black 4556
SuperHyperVertex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4561

Since it’s the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of 4562
a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHy- 4563

tex. There’s only more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the inten- 4568
ded SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }. Thus the non-obvious neut- 4569
rosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is up. The non- 4570
obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper- 4571
137
Forcing, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , H, V4 , V2 , F }, 4572

• On the Figure (1.5), the neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely,

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up.
S = {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }
is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Su- 4575

perHyperForcing. The details are followed by the upcom- 4576
ing statements. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor 4577
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyper- 4580
Set of the SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 },4581
is the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Supe- 4582
rHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 4583
the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious 4589
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is 4590
a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected 4591
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the SuperHyper- 4592
Set of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, 4593
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyper- 4596
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 4598
SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyper- 4599
Vertices, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is the SuperHy- 4600
perSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices 4601
in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black 4602
SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it 4604
is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVer- 4605
tex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since it’s 4606
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }. Thus the non-obvious neutro- 4614
sophic SuperHyperForcing, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, 4615
is up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 4616
138
SuperHyperForcing, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, is a Su- 4617

perHyperSet, {V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V7 , V8 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 }, excludes only 4618

S = {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 },

perHyperForcing. The details are followed by the upcoming 4622
statements. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop 4623
SuperHyperEdge. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 4624
Set of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , 4627
V22 },
Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 4641
Vertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is the Su- 4646
perHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyper- 4647
white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex 4650
if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyper- 4651
Vertex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since it’s 4652
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V466120 , V22 },
139

a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, ex- 4664
cludes only more than one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic 4665


S = {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 },

140


S = {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V13 , V14 },

141



S = {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 },

perHyperForcing. The details are followed by the upcoming 4760
statements. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop 4761
SuperHyperEdge. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 4762
Set of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , 4765
V22 },
Vertices, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, is the Su- 4784
perHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyper- 4785
142

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V4799
20 , V22 },
a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , V5 , V7 , V9 , V21 , V12 , V14 , V16 , V18 , V20 , V22 }, ex- 4802
• On the Figure (1.10), the neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, neutro- 4805

sophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 , V10 , V11 , V12 , V134806, V14 },
143



neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 } is 4854
the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHy- 4855
perForcing. The details are followed by the upcoming statements. 4856
There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. 4857
The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is the 4858
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4859

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is 4860


of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, has more than one SuperHyper- 4872
Vertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple 4873
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To 4874
sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, 4875
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Su- 4876
perHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 4877

{V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices 4878
rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyper- 4881
Vertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black Super- 4882
HyperVertex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since 4883

it’s the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Su- 4884

{V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }. Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, 4891
{V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 4892
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, is a SuperHyper- 4893
144
Set, {V2 , V3 , V5 , V6 }, excludes only more than one SuperHyperVertex in a 4894

connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 4895

S = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 },
is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Supe- 4896

rHyperForcing. The details are followed by the upcoming state- 4897
ments. S = {V1 , V2 , V3 } is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 4898

of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The details are followed 4899
by the upcoming statements. There’s neither empty SuperHy- 4900
perEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The SuperHyperSet of Su- 4901
perHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is the simple type- 4902
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The Super- 4903
HyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is 4904


Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The ob- 4912
vious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 4913
cing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a con- 4914
nected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the Su- 4915
perHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, has 4916

more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyper- 4917
Set. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neut- 4918
rosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the Super- 4919
HyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is the 4920
non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Super- 4921
HyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 4922

{V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHy- 4923


Vertex. There’s only more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the 4935
intended SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }. Thus the non- 4936
obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, 4937
145
SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, is a SuperHyperSet, 4939

{V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V9 }, excludes only more than one SuperHyper- 4940

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 } is 4943
the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHy- 4944

perForcing. The details are followed by the upcoming statements. 4945
There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. 4946
The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is the 4947
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 4948
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is 4949


of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, has more than one SuperHyper- 4961
Vertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple 4962
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To 4963
sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, 4964
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Su- 4965
perHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 4966
{V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices 4967

rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyper- 4970
Vertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black Super- 4971
HyperVertex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since 4972

{V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }. Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, 4980

{V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 4981
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, is a SuperHyper- 4982
Set, {V1 , V2 , V5 , V6 }, excludes only more than one SuperHyperVertex in a 4983
connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 4984

rosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 } is the neutrosophic type- 4986
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The details are 4987
146
followed by the upcoming statements. There’s neither empty SuperHy- 4988

perEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHy- 4989
perVertices, {V1 }, is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 4990
SuperHyperForcing. The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 }, 4991

is the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Super- 4992
is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white Super- 4996
HyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s not only one 4997

SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non- 4998
obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type- 4999
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet 5000
excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHy- 5001
perGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 5002
{V1 }, has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHy- 5003
perSet. Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutro- 5004
sophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of 5005
SuperHyperVertices, {V1 }, is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet 5006
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the 5007
SuperHyperVertices, {V1 }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHy- 5008

a SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyper- 5015

Vertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black 5016
after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white Super- 5017
{V1 }. Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 }, is up. 5021

The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Super- 5022
HyperForcing, {V1 }, is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 }, excludes only more than 5023
N SHG : (V, E). 5025

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. S = {V1 , V3 , V6 } is 5027
the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Super- 5028
HyperForcing. The details are followed by the upcoming state- 5029
ments. There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHy- 5030
perEdge. The SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is 5031
the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 5032

cing. The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is 5033
147


of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, has more than one SuperHyperVertex 5045
outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple type- 5046
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum 5047
them up, the SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is the 5048
non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5049
Forcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, 5050

is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white Super- 5061
HyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more than 5062
one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , V6 }. 5063
Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is 5064

up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 5065
SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, is a SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , V6 }, ex- 5066

S = {V2 , V3 , V4 , V6 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V15 , V14 , V13 , V17 , V16 , V19 , V18 , V21 , V20 },
is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper-

Forcing. The details are followed by the upcoming statements. There’s
neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The Super-
HyperSet of SuperHyperVertices,
is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing.

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices,
is the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Super-

HyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices
148
in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after
finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white Super-
HyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only
white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. In There’s not
only one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus
the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is
a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the SuperHyperSet
of SuperHyperVertices,
has more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet.
Thus the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic
SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the SuperHyperSet of
SuperHyperVertices,
is the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic
SuperHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices,
is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Su-
perHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is
turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”:
a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVer-
tex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHy-
perVertex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since
it’s the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Su-
perHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices
in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely
many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex
is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHy-
perNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more than one
SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet,
{V2 , V3 , V4 , V6 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V15 , V14 , V13 , V17 , V16 , V19 , V18 , V21 , V20 }.
Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing,
is up. The non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic
SuperHyperForcing,
is a SuperHyperSet,
149

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, is up. 5072
S = {V2 , V3 , V4 , V6 , V8 , V9 , V10 , V12 , V15 , V14 , V13 , V17 , V16 , V19 , V18 , V21 , V23 , V1 ,
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5073
Forcing. The details are followed by the upcoming statements. There’s 5074
neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The Super- 5075
HyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, 5076
is the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5077

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 5078
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },


V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },

SuperHyperVertices, 5094
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas Su- 5097

a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVer- 5100
tex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHy- 5101
perVertex and they are neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since 5102
150


perNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only more than one 5108
SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet, 5109
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 }.
Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, 5110
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },

SuperHyperForcing, 5112
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },
V24 , V29 , V25 , V28 , V26 },


S = {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }

neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The Supe- 5118
rHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is the 5119
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The 5120
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, 5121


Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The 5129
obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5130
Forcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a 5131
151
connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). But the 5132

SuperHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, 5133

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. To sum them up, the Su- 5136
perHyperSet of SuperHyperVertices, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is 5137
the non-obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic Supe- 5138
rHyperForcing. Since the SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices, 5139
{V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is the SuperHyperSet Ss of black SuperHy- 5140


tex. There’s only more than one SuperHyperVertex outside the in- 5152
tended SuperHyperSet, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }. Thus the non- 5153

obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, 5154
SuperHyperForcing, {V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, is a SuperHyperSet, 5156
{V1 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }, excludes only more than one SuperHyper- 5157

S = {S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },

Forcing. The details are followed by the upcoming statements.There’s 5162
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },

{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },

152


{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },

{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M }.
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },
153
{S3 , U3 , V4 , V5 , V6 , V7 , V8 , V9 , V10 , R6 , S6 , Z5 , W5 ,
H6 , O6 , E6 , V2 , V3 , R, M6 , L6 , F, P, J, M },


S = {V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },

{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },

{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },


{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
154

{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 }.
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
{V1 , V11 , V4 , U6 , H7 , V5 ,
V7 , V8 , V9 , v8 , W8 , U8 , S8 , T8 , C9 ,
K9 , O9 , L9 , O4 , R4 , R4 , S4 },
155

N SHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, V \ {v} is a neutrosophic Su- 5250
perHyperForcing. In other words, the most neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, 5251
the upper sharp bound for neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, of neutrosophic 5252

SuperHyperForcing is the neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of V \ {v}. 5253

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V is a SuperHyperSet S of 5255
SuperHyperVertex but it isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since it 5260
doesn’t have the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a 5261
bor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one SuperHyperVertex outside 5266
the intended SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}. Thus the obvious neutrosophic Super- 5267
HyperForcing, V \ {v}, is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the 5268
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is a SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}, excludes 5269

N SHG : (V, E). 5271

N SHG : (V, E). Then the extreme number of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 5273
has, the most neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, the upper sharp bound for 5274
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, is the extreme neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5275
Cardinality of V if there’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing with the most 5276
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, the upper sharp bound for neutrosophic 5277
SuperHyperCardinality. 5278
Consider there’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing with the most neutrosophic 5280

SuperHyperCardinality, the upper sharp bound for neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5281
Cardinality. The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V is a SuperHyper- 5282

black SuperHyperVertex but it isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Since 5287
it doesn’t have the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of 5288

Neighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one SuperHyperVertex 5293
outside the intended SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}. Thus the obvious neutrosophic 5294
SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet 5295
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, V \ {v}, is a SuperHyperSet, V \ {v}, 5296
156
excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHy- 5297

perGraph N SHG : (V, E). It implies that extreme number of neutrosophic 5298
SuperHyperForcing has, the most neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, the up- 5299
per sharp bound for neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, is |V | choose |V | − 1. 5300

Thus it induces that the extreme number of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 5301
has, the most neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, the upper sharp bound for 5302
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, is the extreme neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5303
Cardinality of V if there’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing with the most 5304
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality, the upper sharp bound for neutrosophic 5305

N SHG : (V, E). If a SuperHyperEdge has z SuperHyperVertices, then z − 1 5308
number of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any 5309
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5310

Let a SuperHyperEdge has z SuperHyperVertices. Consider z − 2 number 5312
of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any given 5313
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black 5314

SuperHyperVertex but there are two white SuperHyperNeighbors outside 5319
implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex to the SuperHyperSet S does the 5320
“the color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have the minimum neutrosophic 5321

neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet 5328
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one 5329
SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : 5330
(V, E). Thus all the following SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices are the 5331
simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. It’s the 5332
contradiction to the SuperHyperSet S is a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5333

Thus any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices contains the 5334
number of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge with z 5335
SuperHyperVertices less than z − 1 isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5336
Thus if a SuperHyperEdge has z SuperHyperVertices, then z −1 number of those 5337
SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any neutrosophic 5338

N SHG : (V, E). Every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique SuperHyper- 5341
Vertex outside of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. In other words, every 5342
SuperHyperEdge has only one unique white SuperHyperVertex. 5343
157


only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but there are two 5352
white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex to 5353

the SuperHyperSet S does the “the color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have 5354
the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a SuperHyperSet S 5355
colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after finitely many applications 5357
black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black 5359

SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The 5361
obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a 5362
SuperHyperSet excludes only one SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic 5363
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). Thus all the following SuperHyperSets of 5364
SuperHyperVertices are the simple type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 5365

SuperHyperForcing. It’s the contradiction to the SuperHyperSet S is a 5366
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus any given SuperHyperSet of the 5367
SuperHyperVertices contains the number of those SuperHyperVertices from 5368
that SuperHyperEdge with some SuperHyperVertices less than excluding one 5369
unique SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus 5370
if a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding 5371

one unique SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those SuperHyperVertices 5372
from that SuperHyperEdge belong to any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5373
Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), every 5374
SuperHyperEdge has only one unique SuperHyperVertex outside of neutrosophic 5375
SuperHyperForcing. In other words, every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique 5376
white SuperHyperVertex. 5377

N SHG : (V, E). The all exterior SuperHyperVertices belong to any neut- 5379
rosophic SuperHyperForcing if for any of them, there’s only one interior 5380
SuperHyperVertex is a SuperHyperNeighbor to any of them. 5381

Let a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some num- 5383
bers of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge excluding two 5384
unique SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of the Super- 5385
HyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas 5386
white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but there are two 5390
white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex 5391
158
the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of 5393
SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black Super- 5397
HyperVertex. Consider some numbers of those SuperHyperVertices from that 5398
SuperHyperEdge, without any exclusion on some SuperHyperVertices, belong 5399
to any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet 5400
S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are 5401

of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black 5403
SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black Su- 5404
perHyperVertex but it implies it doesn’t have the minimum neutrosophic 5405
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one 5410
SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious neut- 5411
rosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 5412
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one Supe- 5413

rHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 5414
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. It’s the contra- 5416
diction to the SuperHyperSet S is a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus 5417
any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices contains the number of 5418
those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge with some SuperHyper- 5419

Vertices less than excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a neutrosophic 5420
SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 5424
N SHG : (V, E), every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique SuperHyperVertex 5425
outside of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. In other words, every Super- 5426
HyperEdge has only one unique white SuperHyperVertex. In a connected 5427
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), the all exterior SuperHyper- 5428
Vertices belong to any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing if for any of them, 5429
there’s only one interior SuperHyperVertex is a SuperHyperNeighbor to any of 5430
them. 5431
99PRP1 Proposition 2.4.7. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 5432

N SHG : (V, E). The any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing only contains 5433
all interior SuperHyperVertices and all exterior SuperHyperVertices where any 5434
of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor out. 5435

Let a SuperHyperEdge has some SuperHyperVertices. Consider some num- 5437
bers of those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge excluding two 5438
unique SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given SuperHyperSet of the Super- 5439
159
HyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas 5440


white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex but there are two 5444
white SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying there’s no SuperHyperVertex 5445
the minimum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a SuperHyperSet S of 5447
SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black Super- 5451
HyperVertex. Consider some numbers of those SuperHyperVertices from that 5452
SuperHyperEdge, without any exclusion on some SuperHyperVertices, belong 5453
to any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices. The SuperHyperSet 5454
S of black SuperHyperVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are 5455

of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black 5457
SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black Su- 5458
perHyperVertex but it implies it doesn’t have the minimum neutrosophic 5459
only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one 5464
SuperHyperVertex outside the intended SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious neut- 5465
rosophic SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-SuperHyperSet of 5466
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a SuperHyperSet excludes only one Supe- 5467

rHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E). 5468
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. It’s the contra- 5470
diction to the SuperHyperSet S is a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus 5471
any given SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices contains the number of 5472
those SuperHyperVertices from that SuperHyperEdge with some SuperHyper- 5473

Vertices less than excluding one unique SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a neutrosophic 5474
SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 5478
N SHG : (V, E), every SuperHyperEdge has only one unique SuperHyperVertex 5479
outside of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. In other words, every Super- 5480
HyperEdge has only one unique white SuperHyperVertex. In a connected 5481
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), the any neutrosophic Supe- 5482
rHyperForcing only contains all interior SuperHyperVertices and all exterior 5483
SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one SuperHyperNeighbor out. 5484
Remark 2.4.8. The words “neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing” and “SuperHyper- 5485

Dominating” refer to the minimum type-style. In other words, they refer to both 5486
the minimum number and the SuperHyperSet with the minimum neutrosophic 5487
160
2.5. Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses

N SHG : (V, E). A complement of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is the 5490
SuperHyperDominating. 5491

By applying the Proposition (2.4.7), the results are up. Thus in a connected 5493
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E), a complement of neutrosophic 5494
SuperHyperForcing is the SuperHyperDominating. 5495
2.5 Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses 5496
Proposition 2.5.1. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath N SHP : 5497

(V, E). Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 5498
of the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices with 5499
only one exception in the form of interior SuperHyperVertices from any given 5500
SuperHyperEdge with the minimum cardinality. A SuperHyperForcing has the 5501
minimum neutrosophic cardinality on all SuperHyperForcing has the number of 5502
all the SuperHyperVertices minus on the number of exterior SuperHyperParts 5503
plus one. Thus, 5504
N eutrosophic SuperHyperF orcing = {The number-of-all-the-SuperHyperVertices

-minus-on-the-number-of-exterior-SuperHyperParts-plus-one SuperHyperSets of the
SuperHyperVertices | min |the SuperHyperSets of the SuperHyperVertices with only
one exception in the form of interior SuperHyperVertices from any given
SuperHyperEdge.|neutrosophic cardinality amid those SuperHyperSets. }

Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E). Let 5508
a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 5509
Consider some extreme numbers of those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5510

from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding two unique neutrosophic 5511
SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 5512
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of black 5513
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (whereas neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in 5514
applications of “the color-change rule”: a white neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 5516

is converted to a black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white 5517
neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor of a black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 5518
but there are two white neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors outside implying 5519
there’s no neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex to the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 5520
S does the “the color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have the minimum neutro- 5521
sophic SuperHyperCardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of black 5522

neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (whereas neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5523
many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white neutrosophic Supe- 5525
rHyperVertex is converted to a black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex if it 5526
161
is the only white neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor of a black neutrosophic 5527

SuperHyperVertex. Consider some extreme numbers of those neutrosophic Supe- 5528
rHyperVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, without any exclusion 5529
on some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given neutrosophic 5530

SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The neutrosophic 5531
SuperHyperSet S of black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (whereas neutro- 5532
sophic SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is 5533
turned black after finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white 5534
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black neutrosophic SuperHy- 5535
perVertex if it is the only white neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor of a black 5536

neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex but it implies it doesn’t have the minimum 5537
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 5538
black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (whereas neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5539
Vertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after 5540
finitely many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white neutrosophic 5541
SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex if 5542

it is the only white neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor of a black neutrosophic 5543
SuperHyperVertex. There’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside 5544
the intended neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the obvious neutrosophic 5545
SuperHyperForcing is up. The obvious simple type-neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5546
Set of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 5547
excludes only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in a connected neutrosophic 5548

SuperHyperPath N SHP : (V, E). Thus all the following neutrosophic Supe- 5549
rHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are the simple neutrosophic 5550
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. It’s the contradic- 5551
tion to the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S is a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5552
Thus any given neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5553
Vertices contains the number of those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from 5554

that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with some neutrosophic SuperHyperVer- 5555
tices less than excluding one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a 5556
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 5557
has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding one unique 5558
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those neutrosophic Super- 5559
HyperVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge belong to any neutro- 5560

sophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 5561
N SHP : (V, E), every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one unique 5562
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5563
In other words, every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one unique white 5564
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 5565
N SHP : (V, E), the any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing only contains all 5566
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all exterior neutrosophic Super- 5567
HyperVertices where any of them has one neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor 5568
out. Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 5569
of the exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and the interior neutrosophic 5570
SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior neutrosophic 5571
SuperHyperVertices from any given neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 5572

minimum neutrosophic cardinality. A neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing has the 5573
minimum neutrosophic cardinality on all neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing has 5574
the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus on the number 5575
162
Figure 2.1: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of

SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.2) 94NHG18
of exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperParts plus one. Thus, 5576

-minus-on-the-number-of-exterior-SuperHyperParts-plus-one SuperHyperSets of the

94EXM18 Example 2.5.2. In the Figure (2.1), the connected neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5580
Path N SHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. By using the Figure (2.1) 5581
and the Table (2.4), the neutrosophic SuperHyperPath is obtained. 5582
The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, S = V \ {V27 , V3 , V7 , V13 , V22 } of the neut- 5583
rosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 5584
N SHP : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (2.1), is the neutro- 5585
sophic SuperHyperForcing. 5586
Proposition 2.5.3. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle N SHC : 5587

163

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Mentioned in
the Example (2.5.2)

94TBL18

the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus on the number of 5594
exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperParts plus one. Thus, 5595

-minus-on-the-number-of-exterior-SuperHyperParts SuperHyperSets of the

Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E). Let 5599


164




SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E). Thus all the following neutrosophic Supe- 5640
Thus any given neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHy- 5644

perVertices contains the number of those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5645
from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with some neutrosophic SuperHy- 5646
perVertices less than excluding one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 5647
isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a neutrosophic SuperHy- 5648
perEdge has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding one 5649
unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those neutrosophic 5650

SuperHyperVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge belong to any 5651
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHy- 5652
perCycle N SHC : (V, E), every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one 5653
unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside of neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5654
Forcing. In other words, every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one 5655
unique white neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. In a connected neutrosophic 5656

SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E), the any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 5657
only contains all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all exterior 5658
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one neutrosophic Supe- 5659
rHyperNeighbor out. Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic 5660
SuperHyperSet of the exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and the interior 5661
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior 5662
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from any given neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 5663
with the minimum neutrosophic cardinality. A neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 5664
has the minimum neutrosophic cardinality on all neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 5665
cing has the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus on the 5666
number of exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperParts plus one. Thus, 5667

-minus-on-the-number-of-exterior-SuperHyperParts SuperHyperSets of the
165
Figure 2.2: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Notions of


SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Mentioned in
the Example (2.5.4)

94TBL19

94EXM19 Example 2.5.4. In the Figure (2.2), the SuperHyperCycle is highlighted and 5671
featured. By using the Figure (2.2) and the Table (2.5), the neutrosophic 5672
SuperHyperCycle is obtained. 5673
The obtained neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous 5674
result, of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected neutrosophic 5675
SuperHyperCycle N SHC : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (1.22), 5676
is the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5677
166
Proposition 2.5.5. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar N SHS : 5678

the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus on the neutrosophic 5685
cardinality of the second neutrosophic SuperHyperPart plus one. Thus, 5686

-minus-on-the-cardinality-of-second-SuperHyperPart-plus-one SuperHyperSets of the

Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E). Let 5690


167



SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E). Thus all the following neutrosophic Super- 5731
HyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are the simple neutrosophic 5732

that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5737
less than excluding one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a neutro- 5738
sophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has some 5739
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding one unique neutrosophic 5740
SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5741

from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge belong to any neutrosophic SuperHy- 5742
perForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E), 5743
every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one unique neutrosophic Super- 5744
HyperVertex outside of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. In other words, every 5745
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one unique white neutrosophic Super- 5746
HyperVertex. In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E), the 5747

any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing only contains all interior neutrosophic Su- 5748
perHyperVertices and all exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices where any 5749
of them has one neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor out. Then a neutrosophic 5750
SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the exterior neutro- 5751
sophic SuperHyperVertices and the interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5752
with only one exception in the form of interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5753
from any given neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the minimum neutrosophic 5754
cardinality. A neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing has the minimum neutrosophic 5755
cardinality on all neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing has the number of all the 5756
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus on the neutrosophic cardinality of the 5757
second neutrosophic SuperHyperPart plus one. Thus, 5758

-minus-on-the-cardinality-of-second-SuperHyperPart-plus-one SuperHyperSets of the
168
Figure 2.3: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Notions of


SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Mentioned in
the Example (2.5.6)

94TBL20
94EXM20 Example 2.5.6. In the Figure (2.3), the SuperHyperStar is highlighted and 5762
featured. By using the Figure (2.3) and the Table (2.6), the neutrosophic 5763
SuperHyperStar is obtained. 5764
SuperHyperStar N SHS : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (2.3), 5767
is the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5768
Proposition 2.5.7. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 5769
N SHB : (V, E). Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic 5770

169

neutrosophic cardinality of the first neutrosophic SuperHyperPart plus the second 5777
neutrosophic SuperHyperPart. Thus, 5778

-minus-on-the-cardinality-of-first-SuperHyperPart-plus-second-SuperHyperPart
SuperHyperSets of the SuperHyperVertices | min |the SuperHyperSets of the
SuperHyperVertices with only one exception in the form of interior
SuperHyperVertices from any given SuperHyperEdge.
|neutrosophic cardinality amid those SuperHyperSets. }

Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E). 5782

Let a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 5783




170


SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E). Thus all the following neutrosophic Su- 5823
perHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are the simple neutrosophic 5824

that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with some neutrosophic SuperHyperVer- 5829
tices less than excluding one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a 5830
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 5831
has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding one unique 5832
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those neutrosophic SuperHy- 5833
perVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge belong to any neutrosophic 5834
SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 5835
N SHB : (V, E), every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one unique 5836
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperBi- 5839
partite N SHB : (V, E), the any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing only contains 5840
all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all exterior neutrosophic Supe- 5841
rHyperVertices where any of them has one neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor 5842


the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus on the neutro- 5849
sophic cardinality of the first neutrosophic SuperHyperPart plus the second 5850
neutrosophic SuperHyperPart. Thus, 5851

-minus-on-the-cardinality-of-first-SuperHyperPart-plus-second-SuperHyperPart
171
Figure 2.4: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), Associated

to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.8) 94NHG21

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Mentioned
in the Example (2.5.8)

94TBL21
94EXM21 Example 2.5.8. In Figure (2.4), the SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), is 5855
highlighted and featured. By using the Figure (2.4) and the Table (2.7), the 5856
neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), is obtained. 5857
SuperHyperBipartite N SHB : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 5860

(2.4), is the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. 5861
Proposition 2.5.9. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 5862

N SHM : (V, E). Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic 5863
172
neutrosophic number of the summation on the neutrosophic cardinality of the 5870

neutrosophic SuperHyperParts. Thus, 5871

-minus-on-the-summation-on-cardinalities-of-all-SuperHyperParts
Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : 5875

(V, E). Let a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has some neutrosophic SuperHy- 5876
perVertices. Consider some extreme numbers of those neutrosophic Super- 5877
HyperVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding two unique 5878
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, belong to any given neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5879
Set of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 5880
S of black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (whereas neutrosophic SuperHy- 5881

perVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such that V (G) is turned black after 5882
SuperHyperVertex but there are two white neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors 5886
outside implying there’s no neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex to the neutrosophic 5887

SuperHyperSet S does the “the color-change rule”. So it doesn’t have the min- 5888
imum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 5889
of black neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (whereas neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5890



173


SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E). Thus all the following neutrosophic 5916
SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are the simple neutrosophic 5917

that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5922
less than excluding one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, isn’t a neutro- 5923
sophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has some 5924
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding one unique neutrosophic 5925

SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 5926
from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge belong to any neutrosophic Supe- 5927
rHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 5928
N SHM : (V, E), every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one unique 5929
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMulti- 5932
partite N SHM : (V, E), the any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing only contains 5933
all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all exterior neutrosophic Supe- 5934
rHyperVertices where any of them has one neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor 5935

minimum neutrosophic cardinality. A neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing has 5940
the minimum neutrosophic cardinality on all neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 5941
neutrosophic number of the summation on the neutrosophic cardinality of the 5943

neutrosophic SuperHyperParts. Thus, 5944

-minus-on-the-summation-on-cardinalities-of-all-SuperHyperParts

94EXM22 Example 2.5.10. In Figure (2.5), the SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), 5948
is highlighted and featured. By using the Figure (2.5) and the Table (2.8), the 5949
174
Figure 2.5: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E),

Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.10) 94NHG22
Table 2.8: The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges,

and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
N SHM : (V, E), Mentioned in the Example (2.5.10)

94TBL22
neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), is obtained. 5950

The obtained neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, 5951
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected neutrosophic Supe- 5952
rHyperMultipartite N SHM : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 5953
Proposition 2.5.11. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 5955

N SHW : (V, E). Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic 5956

has the minimum neutrosophic cardinality on all neutrosophic SuperHyper- 5961
Forcing has the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus the 5962
number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. Thus, 5963

-minus-the-number-of-all-the-SuperHyperEdges SuperHyperSets of the
175

Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E). 5967
Let a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 5968




SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E). Thus all the following neutrosophic Supe- 6008
176

Thus any given neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHy- 6012

perVertices contains the number of those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 6013
from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with some neutrosophic SuperHy- 6014
perVertices less than excluding one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 6015
isn’t a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus if a neutrosophic SuperHy- 6016
perEdge has some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then, with excluding one 6017
unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, the all number of those neutrosophic 6018

SuperHyperVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge belong to any 6019
neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. Thus, in a connected neutrosophic Super- 6020
HyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only 6021
one unique neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside of neutrosophic SuperHy- 6022
perForcing. In other words, every neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has only one 6023
unique white neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. In a connected neutrosophic 6024

SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), the any neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 6025
only contains all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all exterior 6026
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices where any of them has one neutrosophic Supe- 6027
rHyperNeighbor out. Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is a neutrosophic 6028
has the minimum neutrosophic cardinality on all neutrosophic SuperHyper- 6033
Forcing has the number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices minus the 6034
number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. Thus, 6035

-minus-the-number-of-all-the-SuperHyperEdges SuperHyperSets of the
94EXM23 Example 2.5.12. In the Figure (2.6), the SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), 6039
is highlighted and featured. By using the Figure (2.6) and the Table (2.9), the 6040
neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is obtained. 6041

SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 6044
2.6 General Results 6046
For the SuperHyperForcing, and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, some 6047

general results are introduced. 6048
177
Figure 2.6: A Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), Associated to

the Notions of SuperHyperForcing in the Example (2.5.12) 94NHG23

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel N SHW :
(V, E), Mentioned in the Example (2.5.12)

94TBL23
Remark 2.6.1. Let remind that the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is 6049
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 6050
Corollary 2.6.2. Assume SuperHyperForcing. Then 6051
N eutrosophic SuperHyperF orcing =

{theSuperHyperF orcingof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperDef ensiveSuperHyper
Alliances|neutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperF orcing. }


letter of the alphabet. Then the notion of neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing and 6056
SuperHyperForcing coincide. 6057

a neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing if and only if it’s a SuperHyperForcing. 6060
178

a strongest SuperHyperCycle if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperCycle. 6063

Graph on the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its neutrosophic 6065

Wheel) on the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its neutrosophic 6069

sophic SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperForcing 6072
isn’t well-defined. 6073

Graph. Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined if and only 6075

Wheel). Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing isn’t well-defined if and only 6079

sophic SuperHyperForcing is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperForcing 6082
is well-defined. 6083

Graph. Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is well-defined if and only if 6085

Wheel). Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing is well-defined if and only if 6089
Then V is 6092
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6093
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6094
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6095
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6096
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6097
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6098

179
Thus, 6102
(i). V is the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6103
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(ii). V is the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6105

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iii). V is the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since 6107

the following statements are equivalent. 6108
∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iv). V is the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6109

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
(v). V is the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6111
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
180
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
(vi). V is connected δ-dual SuperHyperForcing since the following statements 6113

are equivalent. 6114
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
6115
Proposition 2.6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic SuperHyper- 6116

Graph. Then ∅ is 6117
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6120

(i). ∅ is the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6127
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |N (a) ∩ ∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(ii). ∅ is the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6129

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
181
(iii). ∅ is the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6131

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iv). ∅ is the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6133

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(v). ∅ is the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6135
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(vi). ∅ is the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6137
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
6139
Then an independent SuperHyperSet is 6141
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6144
182

S. All SuperHyperMembers of S have no SuperHyperNeighbor inside the Supe- 6149
rHyperSet less than SuperHyperNeighbor out of SuperHyperSet. Thus, 6150
(i). An independent SuperHyperSet is the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6151
Forcing since the following statements are equivalent. 6152
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |N (a)| ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(ii). An independent SuperHyperSet is the strong SuperHyperDefensive 6153

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Ns (a)| ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iii). An independent SuperHyperSet is the connected SuperHyperDefensive 6155

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ S, 0 < |Nc (a)| ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
(iv). An independent SuperHyperSet is the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 6157
perForcing since the following statements are equivalent. 6158
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
183
(v). An independent SuperHyperSet is the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive 6159

∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
(vi). An independent SuperHyperSet is the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive 6161

∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ S, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
6163

SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 6165
minimal 6166
(iv) : O(N SHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6170
(v) : strong O(N SHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6171
(vi) : connected O(N SHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6172

coincide. 6174


|N (zii=1,2,...,t )| = 2t. Thus 6182
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
184
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡

|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| <
|{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| <
|{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.



which is a SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a minimal 6198
(iv) : O(N SHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6202
(v) : strong O(N SHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6203
(vi) : connected O(N SHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6204

coincide. 6206
185


∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 , z10 , z20 , . . . , zt0 }| < |{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 2t − 1 < t − 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \ {xii=1,2,...,t } is SuperHyperDefensive 6215

SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. 6216

(iv). By (i), |V | is minimal and it is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6218
Forcing. Thus it’s a dual |V |-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6219

SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. Then the 6222
number of 6223
(i) : the SuperHyperForcing; 6224
(ii) : the SuperHyperForcing; 6225
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperForcing; 6226
(iv) : the O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 6227
(v) : the strong O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 6228
(vi) : the connected O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing. 6229

186

|N (zii=1,2,...,t )| = 2t. Thus 6239
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| < |{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.


∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ (V \ (V \ {xii=1,2,...,t }))| ≡
|N (yii=1,2,...,t ) ∩ {xii=1,2,...,t })| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1 , |{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 }| <
|{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, t − 1 < t − 1.


SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 6255
(i) : the dual SuperHyperForcing; 6256
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperForcing; 6257
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperForcing; 6258
187
(iv) : the dual O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 6259
(v) : the strong dual O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing; 6260
(vi) : the connected dual O(N SHG)-SuperHyperForcing. 6261


∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t ) ∈ V \ {xi }ti=1
, |N (yii=1,2,...,t , sii=1,2,...,t ∈ N (xii=1,2,...,t )) ∩ S| <
|{z1 , z2 , . . . , zt−1 , z10 , z20 , . . . , zt0 }| < |{x1 , x2 , . . . , xt−1 })| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 2t − 1 < t − 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \{xii=1,2,...,t } isn’t a dual SuperHyper- 6272
Defensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. 6273
(iv). By (i), |V | is minimal and it’s a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6275

Forcing. Thus it isn’t an |V |-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6276

contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the number 6281
of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 6282
O(N SHG)
188
O(N SHG)
O(N SHG)


then 6292
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2

in S. 6298
n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2

n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2

O(N SHG)
+1
(iv). By (i), {xi }i=1 2
O(N SHG)

contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges 6316
plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart is a 6317
189
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6321
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6322
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6323
Proof. (i). Consider the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 6324
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest 6325
SuperHyperPart are in S which is SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A 6326
SuperHyperVertex has either n − 1, 1 or zero SuperHyperNeighbors in S. If the 6327
SuperHyperVertex is in S, then 6328
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 0 < 1.
cing in a given SuperHyperStar. 6330
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 0 < δ.
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6335
Forcing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperBipartite which isn’t a 6336

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 0 < δ.
cing in a given SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite which is neither 6343
a SuperHyperStar nor SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperBipartite. 6344
(iv). By (i), S is a SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Thus it’s an 6346

δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6347

Bipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the number 6351
of 6352
190
O(N SHG)
O(N SHG)
O(N SHG)
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] 6359
the half of multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one 6360
of all the SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the 6361
interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 6362

then 6366
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
in S. 6372
n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2

n n
∀a ∈ S, > |N (a) ∩ S| > − 1 > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
2 2
n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
191


O(N SHG)
+1
(iv). By (i), {xi }i=1
2
O(N SHG)

The number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which 6388
is a dual 6389
(iv) : 1-SuperHyperForcing; 6393
Proof. (i). Consider some SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6396
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. These SuperHyperVertex-type have 6397
some SuperHyperNeighbors in S but no SuperHyperNeighbor out of S. Thus 6398
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.

SuperHyperForcing and number of connected component is |V − S|. 6400
(iv). By (i), S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Thus it’s a 6402
dual 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6403

Then the number is at most O(N SHG) and the neutrosophic number is at most 6406
On (N SHG). 6407

Thus, 6411
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |N (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
192
∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |N (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.

∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Ns (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
V is connected a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6416

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V )| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > |∅| ≡
∀a ∈ V, |Nc (a) ∩ V | > 0 ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
V is a dual δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6418

∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (N (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(N (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
V is a dual strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6420

∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (Ns (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Ns (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
V is a dual connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6422
193
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| > δ ≡

∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ V ))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (Nc (a) ∩ (∅))| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V ) − (∅)| > δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, |(Nc (a) ∩ V )| > δ.
Thus V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing and V is the biggest 6424

SuperHyperSet in N SHG : (V, E). Then the number is at most O(N SHG : 6425
(V, E)) and the neutrosophic number is at most On (N SHG : (V, E)). 6426
which is SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the 6428

neutrosophic number is min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting 6429
t>
2
of dual 6430
(iv) : ( O(N SHG:(V,E))



Proof. (i). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6437
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefens- 6440
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual SuperHy- 6443
t>
2
perDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6444
(ii). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6445
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual strong SuperHyperDefens- 6448
194
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual strong Su- 6451
t>
2
perHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6452
(iii). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6453
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual connected SuperHyperDefens- 6456
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual connected 6459
t>
2
(iv). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6461
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual ( O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1)- 6464
t>
2
( O(N SHG:(V,E))
(v). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6469
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual strong ( O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1)- 6472
t>
2
strong ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

(vi). Consider n half −1 SuperHyperVertices are out of S which is a dual 6477
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
195
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual connected ( O(N SHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)- 6480
t>
2
connected ( O(N SHG:(V,E))


which is ∅. The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 6486
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 6487
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6491

(i). ∅ is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6497
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |N (a) ∩ ∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |N (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6500
(ii). ∅ is a dual strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6501
∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Ns (a) ∩ ∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Ns (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent SuperHy- 6503
perSet in the setting of a dual strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6504
196
(iii). ∅ is a dual connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6505

∀a ∈ S, |Nc (a) ∩ S| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |Nc (a) ∩ ∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < |Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅)| ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, 0 < |Nc (a) ∩ V | ≡
∀a ∈ V, δ > 0.
The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 6507

SuperHyperSet in the setting of a dual connected SuperHyperDefensive 6508
(iv). ∅ is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the following 6510
∀a ∈ S, |(N (a) ∩ S) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(N (a) ∩ ∅) − (N (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6513

(v). ∅ is a dual strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6514
∀a ∈ S, |(Ns (a) ∩ S) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Ns (a) ∩ ∅) − (Ns (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6517
Forcing. 6518
(vi). ∅ is a dual connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing since the 6519
∀a ∈ S, |(Nc (a) ∩ S) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ S))| < δ ≡

∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V \ ∅))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |(Nc (a) ∩ ∅) − (Nc (a) ∩ (V ))| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ ∅, |∅| < δ ≡
∀a ∈ V, 0 < δ.
HyperSet in the setting of a dual connected 0-offensive SuperHyperDefensive 6522
197

which is SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 6525

which is SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 6527
O(N SHG : (V, E)) and the neutrosophic number is On (N SHG : (V, E)), in 6528
the setting of a dual 6529
(iv) : O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6533
(v) : strong O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6534
(vi) : connected O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6535
Proof. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 6536
SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. 6537
(i). Consider one SuperHyperVertex is out of S which is a dual SuperHyperDe- 6538
fensive SuperHyperForcing. This SuperHyperVertex has one SuperHyperNeigh- 6539
bor in S, i.e, suppose x ∈ V \ S such that y, z ∈ N (x). By it’s SuperHyperCycle, 6540
|N (x)| = |N (y)| = |N (z)| = 2. Thus 6541
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ (V \ (V \ {x}))| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ {x})| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |{z}| < |{x})| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 1 < 1.
SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperCycle. 6543

S, i.e, Suppose x ∈ V \ S such that y, z ∈ N (x). By it’s SuperHyperPath, 6546
|N (x)| = |N (y)| = |N (z)| = 2. Thus 6547
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ (V \ (V \ {x}))| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ {x})| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |{z}| < |{x})| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 1 < 1.
SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperPath. 6549
198

S, i.e, Suppose x ∈ V \ S such that y, z ∈ N (x). By it’s SuperHyperWheel, 6552
|N (x)| = |N (y)| = |N (z)| = 2. Thus 6553
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| < |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ (V \ (V \ {x}))| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |N (y) ∩ S| < |N (y) ∩ {x})| ≡
∃y ∈ V \ {x}, |{z}| < |{x})| ≡
∃y ∈ S, 1 < 1.
Thus it’s contradiction. It implies every V \ {x} isn’t a dual SuperHyperDe- 6554
fensive SuperHyperForcing in a given SuperHyperWheel. 6555
(iv). By (i), V is minimal and it’s a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 6557
cing. Thus it’s a dual O(N SHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6558
Forcing. 6559
Thus the number is O(N SHG : (V, E)) and the neutrosophic number is 6561
On (N SHG : (V, E)), in the setting of all types of a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6562

which is SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyper- 6565
MultiPartite. The number is O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the neutrosophic number 6566
is min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 6567
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(N SHG:(V,E))




perDefensive SuperHyperForcing. A SuperHyperVertex has at most n half Supe- 6575
rHyperNeighbors in S. If the SuperHyperVertex is the non-SuperHyperCenter, 6576

then 6577
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

∀a ∈ S, 1 > 0.
If the SuperHyperVertex is the SuperHyperCenter, then 6578
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

n n
∀a ∈ S, > − 1.
2 2
199

perForcing in a given SuperHyperStar. 6580
Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is a dual SuperHyper- 6581
Defensive SuperHyperForcing. 6582
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

δ δ
∀a ∈ S, >n− .
2 2
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6583
Forcing in a given complete SuperHyperBipartite which isn’t a SuperHyperStar. 6584
Consider n half +1 SuperHyperVertices are in S which is a dual SuperHyperDe- 6585

fensive SuperHyperForcing and they are chosen from different SuperHyperParts, 6586
equally or almost equally as possible. A SuperHyperVertex in S has δ half 6587
∀a ∈ S, |N (a) ∩ S| > |N (a) ∩ (V \ S)| ≡

δ δ
∀a ∈ S, >n− .
2 2
6589
Thus it’s proved. It implies every S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive Super- 6590
HyperForcing in a given complete SuperHyperMultipartite which is neither a 6591
SuperHyperStar nor complete SuperHyperBipartite. 6592
O(N SHG:(V,E))
+1
(iv). By (i), {xi }i=1 2
is minimal and it’s a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6594
SuperHyperForcing. Thus it’s a dual O(N SHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1-SuperHyperDefensive 6595
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(N SHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of all dual SuperHyper- 6599
t>
2
Forcing. 6600
Proposition 2.6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the 6601

N SHGs : (V, E) neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type 6602
SuperHyperClass which the result is obtained for the individuals. Then the 6603
results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific 6604
SuperHyperClasses of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 6605
Proof. There are neither SuperHyperConditions nor SuperHyperRestrictions 6606

on the SuperHyperVertices. Thus the SuperHyperResults on individuals, 6607
N SHGs : (V, E), are extended to the SuperHyperResults on SuperHyperFamily, 6608
N SHF : (V, E). 6609
Proposition 2.6.32. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic Super- 6610

HyperGraph. If S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then 6611
∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 6612
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 6613
(ii) vx ∈ E. 6614
200

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S, v ∈ Ns (x).

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : v ∈ Ns (x)
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E, µ(vx) = σ(v) ∧ σ(x).
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E.
6619

Graph. If S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then 6621
(i) S is SuperHyperDominating set; 6622
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 6623

either 6626
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S, v ∈ Ns (x)
or 6627
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : v ∈ Ns (x)
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E.
It implies S is SuperHyperDominating SuperHyperSet. 6628

either 6631
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S, v ∈ Ns (x)
201
or 6632
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (v) ∩ S| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : v ∈ Ns (x)
v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S : vx ∈ E.
Thus every SuperHyperVertex v ∈ V \ S, has at least one SuperHyperNeighbor 6633

in S. The only case is about the relation amid SuperHyperVertices in S in 6634
the terms of SuperHyperNeighbors. It implies there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is 6635
SuperHyperChromatic number. 6636

Graph. Then 6638
(i) Γ ≤ O; 6639
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 6640

Let S = V. 6642
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ V, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ V )|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ ∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > 0
It implies V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. For all Supe- 6643

rHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S, S ⊆ V. Thus for all SuperHyperSets of 6644
SuperHyperVertices S, |S| ≤ |V |. It implies for all SuperHyperSets of Super- 6645
HyperVertices S, |S| ≤ O. So for all SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices 6646
S, Γ ≤ O. 6647
S = V. 6649
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

v ∈ V \ V, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ V )|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |Ns (v) ∩ ∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > |∅|
v ∈ ∅, |Ns (v) ∩ V | > 0
It implies V is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. For all Su- 6650
perHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S, S ⊆ V. Thus for all 6651

SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ 6652
Σv∈V Σ3i=1 σi (v). It implies for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyper- 6653
Vertices S, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ On . So for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic 6654
SuperHyperVertices S, Γs ≤ On . 6655
202

Graph which is connected. Then 6657
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 6658
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 6659

Let S = V − {x} where x is arbitrary and x ∈ V. 6661
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |Ns (x) ∩ {x}|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |∅|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > 0

all SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S = 6 V, S ⊆ V − {x}. Thus for all 6663
SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S = 6 V, |S| ≤ |V − {x}|. It implies 6664
for all SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S = 6 V, |S| ≤ O − 1. So for all 6665
SuperHyperSets of SuperHyperVertices S, Γ ≤ O − 1. 6666
S = V − {x} where x is arbitrary and x ∈ V. 6668
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |Ns (x) ∩ {x}|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > |∅|
|Ns (x) ∩ (V − {x})| > 0

all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S 6= V, S ⊆ V − 6670
{x}. Thus for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S = 6 6671
V, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ Σv∈V −{x} Σ3i=1 σi (v). It implies for all SuperHyperSets of 6672
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S = 6 V, Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s) ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 6673

So for all SuperHyperSets of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices S, Γs ≤ 6674
On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 6675
Proposition 2.6.36. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 6676

(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 6680
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } 6681

are only a dual SuperHyperForcing. 6682
203
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an odd SuperHyperPath. Let S = 6683

vi , vj ∈ V. 6685
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 6688
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
(iv). By (i), S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive Super- 6693
HyperForcing. Thus it’s enough to show that S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } is a 6694

dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is 6695
an odd SuperHyperPath. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all vi , vj ∈ 6696
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, vi vj 6∈ E and vi , vj ∈ V. 6697
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 6700
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

Proposition 2.6.37. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 6704
204
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 6705

Forcing; 6706
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 6707

{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 6708
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 6709
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are 6710
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an even SuperHyperPath. Let S = 6712

{v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } where for all vi , vj ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, vi vj 6∈ E and vi , vj ∈ V. 6713
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn })|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.


is an even SuperHyperPath. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all 6723
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 6727
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
205

Proposition 2.6.38. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperCycle. Then 6731
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6732

(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 6734

{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 6735
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 6736
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are 6737

Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an even SuperHyperCycle. Let 6739

S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } where for all vi , vj ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, vi vj 6∈ E and 6740
vi , vj ∈ V. 6741
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| = 2 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn })|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.


is an even SuperHyperCycle. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all 6751
v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|
206

then 6755
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

Proposition 2.6.39. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperCycle. Then 6759

(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 6763
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } 6764
are only dual SuperHyperForcing. 6765
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an odd SuperHyperCycle. Let S = 6766

vi , vj ∈ V. 6768
v ∈ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 6771
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

(iv). By (i), S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive Supe- 6776
rHyperForcing. Thus it’s enough to show that S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } is 6777
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) 6778
207
is an odd SuperHyperCycle. Let S = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } where for all 6779

v ∈ {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| = 2 >

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }, |Ns (v) ∩ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }| >
|Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 })|

then 6783
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 6> 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃vi+1 ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

Proposition 2.6.40. Let N SHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 6787
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual minimal SuperHyperForcing; 6788
(ii) Γ = 1; 6789
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 6790
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperForcing. 6791
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|
It implies S = {c} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. If 6793

S = {c} − {c} = ∅, then 6794
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 = 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 6> 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So S = {c} − {c} = ∅ isn’t a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It 6795

induces S = {c} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6796
(iv). By (i), S = {c} is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6798
208
Thus it’s enough to show that S ⊆ S 0 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6799

SuperHyperForcing. Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperStar. Let S ⊆ S 0 . 6800
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
It implies S 0 ⊆ S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6801
Proposition 2.6.41. Let N SHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 6802
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a 6803
dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing; 6804
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 6805
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 6806
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only 6807
a dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6808
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperWheel. Let S = 6809

6+3(i−1)≤n
{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 . There are either 6810
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 2 > 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
or 6811
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 3 > 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
6+3(i−1)≤n
It implies S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a 6812
dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. If S 0 = {v1 , v3 } ∪ 6813
6+3(i−1)≤n
{v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 − {z} where z ∈ S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ 6814
6+3(i−1)≤n
{v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 , then There are either 6815
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 < 2 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|

∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | < |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
or 6816
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 = 1 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|

∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
6+3(i−1)≤n
So S 0 = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 − {z} where 6817
6+3(i−1)≤n
z ∈ S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 isn’t a dual Su- 6818
perHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ 6819
209
6+3(i−1)≤n
{v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive 6820
Proposition 2.6.42. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 6823
b n c+1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6824
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 6826
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 6827
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6828
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an odd SuperHyperComplete. Let 6830

bn
2 c+1
S = {vi }i=1 . Thus 6831
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1
2
n
b 2 c+1 bn
2 c+1
0
, then 6833
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1 b n c+1
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
bn
2 c+1
fensive SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDe- 6835
Proposition 2.6.43. Let N SHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. 6838

Then 6839
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 6840
perForcing; 6841
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 6842
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 6843
S={vi }i=1
bnc
2
is only a dual minimal SuperHyperDe- 6844
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is an even SuperHyperComplete. Let 6846

bn
2c
S = {vi }i=1 . Thus 6847
n n
2 2
210
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.

bnc
2
bn
2c bn
2c
0
, then 6849
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
bnc bnc
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
bn2c
SuperHyperForcing. It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a dual minimal SuperHyperDe- 6851

Proposition 2.6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of 6854
neutrosophic SuperHyperStars with common neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 6855

SuperHyperSet. Then 6856
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 6857

(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 6859
(iii) Γs = Σm
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E);
3
6860
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 6861

SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 6862
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| > |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|
It implies S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 6864

cing for N SHF : (V, E). If S = {c} − {c} = ∅, then 6865
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 = 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|

∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| = 0 6> 0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
∃v ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
So S = {c} − {c} = ∅ isn’t a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for 6866
N SHF : (V, E). It induces S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual minimal SuperHyper- 6867

Defensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 6868
(iv). By (i), S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 6870
perForcing for N SHF : (V, E). Thus it’s enough to show that S ⊆ S 0 is a 6871
211
dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). Suppose 6872

N SHG : (V, E) is a SuperHyperStar. Let S ⊆ S 0 . 6873
∀v ∈ V \ {c}, |Ns (v) ∩ {c}| = 1 >

0 = |Ns (v) ∩ (V \ {c})|∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | = 1 >
0 = |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
∀z ∈ V \ S 0 , |Ns (z) ∩ S 0 | > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S 0 )|
It implies S 0 ⊆ S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for 6874

N SHF : (V, E). 6875
Proposition 2.6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 6876

bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive 6879
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 6881

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 6882
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
2
are only a dual minimal SuperHyper- 6883
Forcing for N SHF : (V, E). 6884
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is odd SuperHyperComplete. Let S = 6885

bn
2 c+1
{vi }i=1 . Thus 6886
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing 6887
bn
2 c+1 bn
2 c+1
for N SHF : (V, E). If S = {vi }i=1
0
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|
b n c+1 b n c+1
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
bn
2 c+1
fensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a 6890
dual minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 6891
Proposition 2.6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 6893

bnc
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 6896
perForcing for N SHF : (V, E); 6897
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 6898
212

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 6899
S={vi }i=1
bnc
2
are only dual minimal SuperHyperForcing 6900
for N SHF : (V, E). 6901
Proof. (i). Suppose N SHG : (V, E) is even SuperHyperComplete. Let 6902

bn
2c
S = {vi }i=1 . Thus 6903
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| > |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
bnc
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for 6904
bn
2c bn
2c
N SHF : (V, E). If S = {vi }i=1
0
n n
2 2
∀z ∈ V \ S, |Ns (z) ∩ S| >
6 |Ns (z) ∩ (V \ S)|.
bnc bnc
So S 0 = {vi }i=1
2
− {z} where z ∈ S = {vi }i=1
2
bn
2c
SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). It induces S = {vi }i=1 is a dual 6907
minimal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing for N SHF : (V, E). 6908
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is 6912

an t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then S is an s- 6913


∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t ≤ s;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < s.
Thus S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6921
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t ≥ s;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > s.
Thus S is a dual s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6925
213

(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices 6928

is an t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, then S is an s- 6929
SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperForcing; 6930

SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperForcing. 6933

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < t ≤ t + 2 ≤ s;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < s.
Thus S is an (t + 2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. By S 6937
is an s−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing and S is a dual (s + 6938

2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 6939
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > t ≥ s > s − 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > s − 2.
Thus S is an (s − 2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. By S 6944

is an (s − 2)−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing and S is a dual 6945
s−SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing, S is an s−SuperHyperPowerful 6946
Proposition 2.6.49. Let N SHG : (V, E) be a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform- 6948
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b 2r c + 1, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 6952

(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is an r- 6954


r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6957
214

r r
2 2
r r
2 2
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

r r
2 2
r r
2 2
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r − 0 = r;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r.
Thus S is an r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6966

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r − 0 = r;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r.
Thus S is a dual r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 6969

(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b 2r c + 1 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 6974

(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a)∩V \S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 6976

(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual r- 6978

215

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

r r
2 2
r r
2 2
r r
2 2
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

r r
2 2
r r
2 2
r r
2 2
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and an r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperFor- 6986
cing. 6987
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r = r − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < r − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = r, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r = r − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > r − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = r, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
6991

(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b O−1

2 c + 1 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 6997
216
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)- 6999

(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual (O − 1)- 7001


neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and an 2- SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyper- 7004
Forcing. Then 7005
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 7010
HyperForcing. 7011
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 = O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = O − 1, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 = O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| = O − 1, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
7015
217

(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| b O−1

2 c + 1, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 7021
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is (O − 1)- 7023


(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 7026

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

O−1 O−1
2 2
O−1 O−1
2 2
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1 − 0 = O − 1;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < O − 1.
Thus S is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 7035

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1 − 0 = O − 1;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > O − 1.
Thus S is a dual (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 7038
218

(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if N SHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 7042

(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 7044

(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a)∩V \S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 7046
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 7048

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHy- 7051

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| < 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 7054

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| > 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S) = 0.
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 7057

HyperForcing. 7058
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| < 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and S is a dual r-SuperHyperDefensive Super- 7060

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 = 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| > 2, |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| = 0.
7062
219

(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then N SHG : (V, E) is an 2- 7066

(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then N SHG : (V, E) is a dual 2- 7068

(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then N SHG : (V, E) is an 2- 7070

2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperForcing. 7073

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| < 2.

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0;

∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2 − 0 = 2;
∀t ∈ V \ S, |Ns (t) ∩ S| − |Ns (t) ∩ (V \ S)| > 2.
220

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite

94TBL21b
2.7 Applications in Cancer’s Recognitions 7086
on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is considered and as the 7088
consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells are under 7089
attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are 7090
the matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some 7091
treatments for this disease. 7092

In the following, some steps are devised on this disease. 7093
Step 1. (Definition) The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 7094
Step 2. (Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 7095
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 7096
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be 7097
easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and 7098
neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; 7099
this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be neutrosophic 7100
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened 7101
and what’s done. 7102
Step 3. (Model) There are some specific models, which are well-known and 7103
they’ve got the names, and some general models. The moves and the 7104
traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated 7105
groups of cells could be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(- 7106
/SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyper- 7107
Multipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the SuperHy- 7108
perForcing or the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing in those neutrosophic 7109

SuperHyperModels. 7110
Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 7111
SuperHyperModel 7112
Step 4. (Solution) In the Figure (2.7), the SuperHyperBipartite is highlighted 7113

and featured. 7114
By using the Figure (2.7) and the Table (2.10), the neutrosophic 7115
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 7116
221

Forcing 94NHG21b

SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite

94TBL22b
Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 7117
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel 7118
Step 4. (Solution) In the Figure (2.8), the SuperHyperMultipartite is high- 7119

lighted and featured. 7120
By using the Figure (2.8) and the Table (2.11), the neutrosophic Super- 7121
HyperMultipartite is obtained. 7122
2.8 Open Problems 7123
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 7124
The SuperHyperForcing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing are defined 7125
on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 7126
Question 2.8.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on 7127
Cancer’s recognitions? 7128
222
2.9. Conclusion and Closing Remarks

perForcing 94NHG22b
Question 2.8.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperFor- 7129

cing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing? 7130
Question 2.8.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyper- 7131
Models to compute them? 7132
Question 2.8.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 7133
SuperHyperForcing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing? 7134
Problem 2.8.5. The SuperHyperForcing and the neutrosophic SuperHyperFor- 7135

cing do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on 7136
SuperHyperForcing, are there else? 7137
Problem 2.8.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 7138
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 7139
Problem 2.8.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 7140
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 7141
2.9 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 7142
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The 7143
drawbacks of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages 7144
of this research are highlighted. 7145
This research uses some approaches to make neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 7146
more understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined 7147

on the SuperHyperForcing. For that sake in the second definition, the main 7148
definition of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position 7149
of the alphabets. Based on the new definition for the neutrosophic SuperHy- 7150
perGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, finds 7151
223
the convenient background to implement some results based on that. Some 7152
SuperHyperClasses and some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases 7153
of this research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of 7154
the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s 7155
Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHy- 7156
perForcing, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. 7157
Some general results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperForcing and 7158
the neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. The clarifications, instances and literat- 7159
ure reviews have taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature 7160
reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the results. The Supe- 7161
rHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels 7162
on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this 7163
research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 7164
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel 7165
proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of 7166
the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 7167
and the architecture are formally called “SuperHyperForcing” in the themes of 7168
jargons and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the 7169
embedded styles to figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In
Table 2.12: A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Research 96tbl
Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperForcing
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
7170
the Table (2.12), some limitations and advantages of this research are pointed 7171
out. 7172
224
Bibliography 7173

tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 7176


prints202212.0549.v1). 7183

prints202212.0549.v1). 7187

2022, 2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 7192


10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 7199

10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 7203
225
Bibliography

10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 7207
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 7214

33 (2020) 290-296. (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3783103). 7226

App. Eng. Math. 8 (1) (2018) 122-135. 7228

Theory 10 (2016) 86-101. 7230

Multistructure 4 (2010) 410-413. 7232
Press, 2006. 7234
226
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Tehran, Iran · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · +989120790848
Henry Garrett CV
Status: Known as Henry Garrett. I use a published name for my contributions.
I’ll change my name in the future but now, I use this name. I’ll migrate
to the U.S. and after that, I will change my name to this published name.
I want to start a new life there. 7235
Fields: Combinatorics, Algebraic Structures, Algebraic Hyperstructures, Fuzzy

Logic
Prefers: Graph Theory, Domination, Metric Dimension, Neutrosophic Graph

Theory, Neutrosophic Domination, Lattice Theory, Groups and
Hypergroups
Activities: Traveling, Painting, Writing, Reading books and Papers
Education
2017 - 2022 Ph.D. in Pure Math Payame Noor University
Title of Ph.D.’s Thesis: Domination On Fuzzy and Neutrosophic (Hyper) Graphs

Supervisors: Dr. Mohammad Hamidi and Dr. Akefe Radfar
2014 - 2016 Graduated as M.Sc. Pure Math SRTTU
Title of Master’s Thesis: Simultaneous Metric Dimension of Graph Families

Supervisor: Dr. Hamidreza Maimani, Advisor: Dr. Ali Zaeembashi
2010 - 2013 B.Sc. in Mathematical Teacher (Ministry of Education Scholarship) University of Qom
Inter-cultural classes in Persian, covering special topics in Mathematics, Teaching, Com-

puter Science, Statistics, Teacher Training and Educational Psychology
Professionalized in research methods, software development and e-assessment
2011 / 2012 Semester in others
Undergraduated six months of study and trans-cultural experiences at Arak and Malayer
Universities in the summer semester
Finished Calculus III, Statistics and Probability I
Course
2017-2022 Ph.D. Payame Noor University
Implicative Algebras- 4 units, Topics in Fuzzy Algebra- 4 units, Topics in Theory of Hy-
perstructures - 4 units
Theory of Ordered Algebras- 4 units, Special Topics in Theory of Categories - 2 units
2014-2016 M.Sc. SRTTU
Real Analysis- 4 units, Advanced Algebra- 4 units

Algebraic Topology- 4 units, Graph Theory- 4 units, Coding Theory- 4 units
2010-2013 B.Sc. University of Qom

Math: Calculus I, II, III (Vector Calculus)- 12 units, Principle of Mathematics- 4 units,
Statistics and Probability I, II- 8 units, Linear Algebra I- 4 units, Algebra I, II (Galois
Theory),III- 12 units, Numbers Theory -3 units, Mathematical Analysis I, II- 8 units,
Numerical Analysis- 4 units, Differential Equations- 3 units, The Basics of Dynamic
Systems- 3 units, Discrete Mathematics- 4 units, Mathematics History- 2 units, Operation
Research- 4 units, Math lab. (MATLAB)- 1 units 7236
Computer: Computer Principles and Programming- 4 units
Teacher: Fundamentals of Geometry- 4 units, Math Education I,II- 8 units, Child and
adolescent psychology- 2 units, Fundamentals of Curriculum Planning- 2 units,
Evaluating and Measuring- 2 units, Educational Psychology- 2 units, Principles
and techniques of advice and guidance- 2 units, Production and application of
educational materials- 2 units, Principles and philosophy of education- 3 units, Education
Management- 2 units, Teacher Training- No unit, Methods and techniques of teaching
(general)- No unit
Optional: Principles of Management and Organization Theory- 2 units, Assess- ment of work
and time- 3 units
General: Physics-10 units, Persian Literature- 3 units, English Language- 7 units, Islamic
courses- 11 units, Exercise I,II- 2 unit
Teaching Experiences
2017 - Present Math Official Teacher of Grades 10 to 12 Ministry of Education
I tried to show that teaching math is as much a human endeavor as a scientific one
I tried to show them that Science is not only interesting, it’s beautiful and exciting.
2015 - 2017 Math Official Teacher of Grades 7 to 9 Ministry of Education
They come in with very different abilities and interests, and while I can’t make them better
at mathematics, I believe I can increase their interest
I tried to show that teaching math is as much a human endeavor as a scientific one
2008 - 2015 Math Official Teacher of Grades 10 to 12 Ministry of Education
I studied with the scholarship of this Ministry and started working as an formal teacher
Professional Experiences
2017 - Present Continuous Member AMS
Participating in the academic space of the largest mathematical Society gave me valuable
experiences. The use of Bulletin and Notice of the American Mathematical Society is another
benefit of this presence.
2017 - 2019 Continuous Member EMS
The use Newsletter of the European Mathematical Society is benefit of this membership.
I am interested in giving a small, though small, effect on math epidemic progress
2017 - 2019 Continuous Member IFSS
IFSS is an abbreviation for Iranian Fuzzy Systems Society

Help to grow this field and get more people to know about it
2016- 2018 Continuous Member IMS
IMS is an abbreviation for Iranian Mathematical Society

The right to participate in the election, the use of newsletters and bulletins, as in the AMS,
were the experiences of membership in this mathematical society.
Miscellaneous Experiences
7237
2016 First Grade SRTTU
Ranked 1st among M.Sci. students of Pure Mathematics (Tehran, Iran) 2016
I got this rank by GPA of 18.59 out of 20.
Technical Skills
Language
Persian (C2)
English (A1)
Programming Languages and other technologies
C (Advanced), Pascal (Advanced), HTML (Intermediate), Java (Beginner)

JavaScript (Beginner)
Operating Systems
Dos (Intermediate), Windows 98 (Advanced), Windows xp (Advanced), Windows 7 (Ad-

vanced), Windows 8 (Advanced), Windows 10 (Advanced)
MacOS (Advanced), MacOS High Sierra 10.13.4 (17E199) (Advanced), Linux (Beginner)
Application Software
Latex (Advanced), Matlab (Advanced), Autoplay Media Studio (Advanced)

Photoshop (intermediate), Internet related tools (Advanced), Corel (Beginner)
Awards and Achievements
Sep 2022 Award: Selected as an Editorial Board Member to JMTCM JMTCM
Award: Selected as an Editorial Board Member to Journal of Mathematical Techniques and

Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)
Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)
Jun 2022 Award: Selected as an Editorial Board Member to JCTCSR JCTCSR
Award: Selected as an Editorial Board Member to Journal of Current Trends in Computer

Science Research(JCTCSR)
Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research(JCTCSR)
Jan 23, 2022 Award: Diploma By Neutrosophic Science International Association Neutrosophic Science International
Association
Award: Distinguished Achievements

Honorary Memebrship
Aug 2018 Award: Selected as a Reviewer to JME JME

Award: Selected as a Reviewer to Journal of Mathematical Extension (JME)

JME is abstracted and indexed in the following databases: Thomson Reuters(ESCI) Google
Scholar Islamic World Science Citation Center(ISC) Mathematical Reviews(MathSciNet)
Zentralblatt MATH AMS Digital Mathematics Registry Ebsco Directory of Open Access
Journals(DOAJ) OCLC WorldCat knowledge base English E-Journals Database (RICeST)
Scientific Information Database (SID) According to the authentication letter numbered
3/18/311314 dated 25 February 2019 issued by the Iranian Ministry of Science, Research
7238
and
Technology, Journal of Mathematical Extension is ranked as a “Scientific” Journal.
Aug 2018 Award: Selected as a Reviewer to IJIM IJIM
Award: Selected as a Reviewer to International Journal of Industrial Mathematics (IJIM)

Indexing and Abstracting in: ISC, University of Zurich, Zentralblatt MATH, Universal Im-
pact Factor, Magiran, SID, Journalseeker, Active Search Results (ASR), Index Copernicus,
Entireweb, CrossRef, Google Scholar, ISC Journals Master List, Social Science Research Center
Berlin, IRCeST
Sep 2016 Award: First Grade SRTTU
Award: 1st among M.Sci. students of Pure Mathematics (Tehran, Iran) 2016
I got this award by GPA of 18.59 out of 20.
Journal Referee
Sep 2022 Editorial Board Member to JMTCM JMTCM
Editorial Board Member to Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational

Mathematics(JMTCM)
Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)
Jun 2022 Editorial Board Member to JCTCSR JCTCSR
Editorial Board Member to Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science

Research(JCTCSR)
Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research(JCTCSR)
Aug 2018 Reviewer to International Journal of Industrial Mathematics (IJIM) IJIM
Reviewer to International Journal of Industrial Mathematics (IJIM)

Indexing and Abstracting in: ISC, University of Zurich, Zentralblatt MATH, Universal Im-
pact Factor, Magiran, SID, Journalseeker, Active Search Results (ASR), Index Copernicus,
Entireweb, CrossRef, Google Scholar, ISC Journals Master List, Social Science Research Center
Berlin, IRCeST
Aug 2018 Reviewer to Journal of Mathematical Extension (JME) JME
Reviewer to Journal of Mathematical Extension (JME)

JME is abstracted and indexed in the following databases: Thomson Reuters(ESCI) Google
Scholar Islamic World Science Citation Center(ISC) Mathematical Reviews(MathSciNet)
Zentralblatt MATH AMS Digital Mathematics Registry Ebsco Directory of Open Access
Journals(DOAJ) OCLC WorldCat knowledge base English E-Journals Database (RICeST)
Scientific Information Database (SID) According to the authentication letter numbered
3/18/311314 dated 25 February 2019 issued by the Iranian Ministry of Science, Research and
Technology, Journal of Mathematical Extension is ranked as a “Scientific” Journal.
Publications: Articles
2022 0099 | Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling Manuscript
in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs
Henry Garrett,“Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic)
SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”,
ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487).
2022 0098 | (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) Manuscript
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances
Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions Featuring
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 2022, 2022120549 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1).
2022 0098 | (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) Manuscript

7239
SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances
Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, ResearchGate 2022,
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19380.94084).
2022 0097 | (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Manuscript

Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling
of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses

Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive and
SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic)
SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1).
2022 0097 | (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Manuscript

Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling
of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses

Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive and
SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic)
SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923).
2022 0096 | SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With Manuscript

SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, Preprints 2022,
2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1).
2022 0096 | SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With Manuscript

SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, ResearchGate
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640).
2022 0095 | Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Manuscript

and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments
Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”,
Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1).
2022 0095 | Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Manuscript

And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments
Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”,
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641).
2022 0094 | SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Manuscript

Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses
Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic

SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1).
2022 0094 | SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Manuscript

Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses 7240
Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966).
2022 0093 | Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside Chromatic Numbers in the Setting Article
of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic Hypergraphs
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside Chromatic
Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends
Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14.
PDF,Abstract,Issue.
2022 0092 | Recognition of the Pattern for Vertices to Make Dimension by Resolving in some Classes of Manuscript
Neutrosophic Graphs
Henry Garrett, “Recognition of the Pattern for Vertices to Make Dimension
by Resolving in some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.27281.51046).
2022 0091 | Regularity of Every Element to Function in the Type of Domination in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Regularity of Every Element to Function in the Type of Domination in

Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22861.10727).
2022 0090 | Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Manuscript
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)
Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic
Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
(NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160).
2022 0089 | Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating and Manuscript
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph
Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning Neutrosophic
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244).
2022 0088 | Seeking Empty Subgraphs To Determine Different Measurements in Some Classes of Manuscript
Neutrosophic Graphs
Henry Garrett, “Seeking Empty Subgraphs To Determine Different Measurements in Some
Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30448.53766).
2022 0087 | Impacts of Isolated Vertices To Cover Other Vertices in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Impacts of Isolated Vertices To Cover Other Vertices in Neutrosophic

Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16185.44647).
2022 0086 | Perfect Locating of All Vertices in Some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Perfect Locating of All Vertices in Some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”,
2022 0085 | Complete Connections Between Vertices in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Complete Connections Between Vertices in Neutrosophic

7241
Graphs”,
2022 0084 | Unique Distance Differentiation By Collection of Vertices in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Unique Distance Differentiation By Collection of Vertices in Neutrosophic

2022 0083 | Single Connection Amid Vertices From Two Given Sets Partitioning Vertex Set in Some Classes Manuscript
of Neutrosophic Graphs
Henry Garrett, “Single Connection Amid Vertices From Two Given Sets Partitioning
Vertex Set in Some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.32189.33764).
2022 0082 | Separate Joint-Sets Representing Separate Numbers Where Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
and Applications are Cases of Study
Henry Garrett, “Separate Joint-Sets Representing Separate Numbers Where Classes
of Neutrosophic Graphs and Applications are Cases of Study”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.22666.95686).
2022 0081 | Repetitive Joint-Sets Featuring Multiple Numbers For Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Repetitive Joint-Sets Featuring Multiple Numbers For Neutrosophic

2022 0080 | Dual-Resolving Numbers Excerpt from Some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs With Some Manuscript
Applications
Henry Garrett, “Dual-Resolving Numbers Excerpt from Some Classes of Neutrosophic
Graphs With Some Applications”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14971.39200).
2022 0079 | Dual-Dominating Numbers in Neutrosophic Setting and Crisp Setting Obtained From Classes Manuscript
of Neutrosophic Graphs
Henry Garrett, “Dual-Dominating Numbers in Neutrosophic Setting and Crisp
Setting Obtained From Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.19925.91361).
2022 0078 | Neutrosophic Path-Coloring Numbers BasedOn Endpoints In Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Path-Coloring Numbers BasedOn Endpoints In Neutrosophic

2022 0077 | Neutrosophic Dominating Path-Coloring Numbers in New Visions of Classes of Neutrosophic Manuscript
Graphs
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Dominating Path-Coloring Numbers in New Visions of Classes
of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32151.65445).
2022 0076 | Path Coloring Numbers of Neutrosophic Graphs Based on Shared Edges and Neutrosophic Manuscript
Cardinality of Edges With Some Applications from Real-World Problems
Henry Garrett, “Path Coloring Numbers of Neutrosophic Graphs Based on Shared Edges
and Neutrosophic Cardinality of Edges With Some Applications from Real-World Problems”,
2022 0075 | Neutrosophic Collapsed Numbers in the Viewpoint of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
7242
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Collapsed Numbers in the Viewpoint of Neutrosophic Graphs”,
2022 0074 | Bulky Numbers of Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs Based on Neutrosophic Edges Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Bulky Numbers of Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs Based on Neutrosophic

Edges”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24204.18564).
2022 0073 | Dense Numbers and Minimal Dense Sets of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Dense Numbers and Minimal Dense Sets of Neutrosophic Graphs”,
2022 0072 | Connectivities of Neutrosophic Graphs in the terms of Crisp Cycles Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Connectivities of Neutrosophic Graphs in the terms of Crisp Cycles”,

2022 0071 | Strong Paths Defining Connectivities in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Strong Paths Defining Connectivities in Neutrosophic Graphs”,

2022 0070 | Finding Longest Weakest Paths assigning numbers to some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Finding Longest Weakest Paths assigning numbers to some Classes of
Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35579.59689).
April 12, 2022 0069 | Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Article
Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic

SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi:
10.5281/zenodo.6456413). (http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf).
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss_journal/vol49/iss1/34).
Available at NSS, NSS Gallery, UNM Digital Repository, Twitter, ResearchGate, Scribd,
Academia, Zenodo, LinkedIn
2022 0068 | Relations and Notions amid Hamiltonicity and Eulerian Notions in Some Classes of Manuscript
Neutrosophic Graphs
Henry Garrett, “Relations and Notions amid Hamiltonicity and Eulerian Notions in Some
Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35579.59689).
2022 0067 | Eulerian Results In Neutrosophic Graphs With Applications Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Eulerian Results In Neutrosophic Graphs With Applic- ations”,

2022 0066 | Finding Hamiltonian Neutrosophic Cycles in Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Finding Hamiltonian Neutrosophic Cycles in Classes of Neutrosophic

2022 0065 | Extending Sets Type-Results in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Extending Sets Type-Results in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13317.01767). 7243
2022 0064 | Some Polynomials Related to Numbers in Classes of (Strong) Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Some Polynomials Related to Numbers in Classes of (Strong) Neutrosophic

2022 0063 | Finding Shortest Sequences of Consecutive Vertices in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Finding Shortest Sequences of Consecutive Vertices in Neutrosophic

2022 0062 | Neutrosophic Girth Based On Crisp Cycle in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Girth Based On Crisp Cycle in Neutrosophic Graphs”,

2022 0061 | e-Matching Number and e-Matching Polynomials in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “e-Matching Number and e-Matching Polynomials in Neutrosophic Graphs”,

2022 0060 | Matching Polynomials in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Matching Polynomials in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:

10.13140/RG.2.2.33630.72002).
2022 0059 | Some Results in Classes Of Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Some Results in Classes Of Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022,

2022030248 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202203.0248.v1).
2022 0058 | Matching Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Matching Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:

10.13140/RG.2.2.18609.86882).
2022 0057 | Fuzzy Dominating Number Based On Fuzzy Bridge And Applicaions Article
M. Hamidi, and M. Nikfar, “Fuzzy Dominating Number Based On Fuzzy

Bridge And Applicaions”, Fuzzy Systems and its Applications 4(2) (2022) 205-229
(https://doi.org/10.22034/jfsa.2022.306606.1092).
Oct 2018 0056 | The Effects of Mathematics on Computer Sciences Conference Article
M. Nikfar, “The Effects of Mathematics on Computer Sciences”, Second Conference

on the Education and Applications of Mathematics, Kermanshah, Iran, 2018
(https://en.civilica.com/doc/824659).
2022 0055 | (Failed) 1-clique Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript

7244
Henry Garrett, “(Failed) 1-Clique Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14241.89449).
2022 0054 | Failed Clique Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Failed Clique Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.36039.16800).
2022 0053 | Clique Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Clique Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:

10.13140/RG.2.2.28338.68800).
2022 0052 | (Failed) 1-independent Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “(Failed) 1-Independent Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate

2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30593.12643).
2022 0051 | Failed Independent Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Failed Independent Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022,

2022020334 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202202.0334.v2)
2022 0051 | Failed Independent Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Failed Independent Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31196.05768).
2022 0050 | Independent Set in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Independent Set in Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022, 2022020334 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202202.0334.v1).
2022 0050 | Independent Set in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Independent Set in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:

10.13140/RG.2.2.17472.81925).
2022 0049 | (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate

2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35241.26724).
2022 0048 | Failed Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript

Henry Garrett, “Failed Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022,

2022020343 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202202.0343.v1).
2022 0048 | Failed Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Failed Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, 7245

ResearchGate 2022
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24873.47209).
2022 0047 | Zero Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Zero Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.32265.93286).
2022 0046 | Quasi-Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Quasi-Number in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:

10.13140/RG.2.2.18470.60488).
2022 0045 | Quasi-Degree in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Quasi-Degree in Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022, 2022020100 (doi:

10.20944/preprints202202.0100.v1).
2022 0045 | Quasi-Degree in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Quasi-Degree in ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25460.01927).

2022 0044 | Co-Neighborhood in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Co-Neighborhood in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:

10.13140/RG.2.2.17687.44964).
2022 0043 | Global Powerful Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Global Powerful Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022,
2022010429 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202201.0429.v1).
2022 0043 | Global Powerful Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Global Powerful Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate

2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31784.24322).
2022 0042 | Global Offensive Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Global Offensive Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2022,
2022010429 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202201.0429.v1).
2022 0042 | Global Offensive Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Global Offensive Alliance in Strong Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate

2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26541.20961).
2022 0041 | Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Connectedness and (Strong) Edges Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Connectedness and (Strong)
Edges”, Preprints 2022, 2022010239 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202201.0239.v1).
2022 0041 | Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Connectedness and (Strong) Edges Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Connectedness and (Strong)
7246
Edges”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18486.83521).

2022 0040 | Three types of neutrosophic alliances based of connectedness and (strong) edges (In-Progress) Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Three types of neutrosophic alliances based of connectedness and (strong)
edges (In-Progress)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27570.12480).
2022 0039 | Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring Manuscript
alongside (Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph
Henry Garrett, “Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and
(Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints
2022, 2022010145 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202201.0145.v1).
2022 0039 | Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring Manuscript
alongside (Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph
Henry Garrett, “Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving
and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph”,
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18909.54244/1).
2022 0038 | Co-degree and Degree of classes of Neutrosophic Hypergraphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Co-degree and Degree of classes of Neutrosophic Hypergraphs”, Preprints

2022, 2022010027 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202201.0027.v1).
2022 0038 | Co-degree and Degree of classes of Neutrosophic Hypergraphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Co-degree and Degree of classes of Neutrosophic Hypergraphs”,

2021 0037 | Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neutrosophic Hypergraphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neutrosophic

Hypergraphs”, Preprints 2021, 2021120448 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202112.0448.v1).
2021 0037 | Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neutrosophic Hypergraphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neutrosophic

Hypergraphs”, ResearchGate 2021 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13070.28483).
2021 0036 | Different Types of Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Different Types of Neutrosophic Chromatic Number”, Preprints 2021,

2021120335 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202112.0335.v1).
2021 0036 | Different Types of Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Manuscript

Henry Garrett, “Different Types of Neutrosophic Chromatic Number”, ResearchGate 2021

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19068.46723).
2021 0035 | Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Based on Connectedness Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Based on Connectedness”,

7247
Preprints 2021,
2021120226 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202112.0226.v1).
2021 0035 | Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Based on Connectedness Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Based on Connectedness”, ResearchGate

2021 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18563.84001).
2021 0034 | Chromatic Number and Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Chromatic Number and Neutrosophic Chromatic Number”, Preprints 2021,
2021120177 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202112.0177.v1).
2021 0034 | Chromatic Number and Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Chromatic Number and Neutrosophic Chromatic Number”, ResearchGate

2021 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36035.73766).
2021 0033 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs #12 Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs #12”, ResearchGate 2021

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20690.48322).

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29308.46725).

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21614.54085).

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34040.16648).

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19464.96007).
2021 0028 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-VII Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-VII”, ResearchGate 2021

(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14667.72481).
2021 0028 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-VII Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-VII”, Preprints 2021,

2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v7).
2021 0027 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-VI Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-VI”, Preprints

72482021,
2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v6).

2021 0026 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-V Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-V”, Preprints 2021,

2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v5).
2021 0025 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-IV Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-IV”, Preprints 2021,

2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v4).
2021 0024 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-III Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-III”, Preprints 2021,

2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v3).
2021 0023 | Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-II Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs-II”, Preprints 2021,

2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v2).
2021 0022 | Metric Dimension in Fuzzy Graphs and Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimension in Fuzzy Graphs and Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints
2021, 2021110142 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202111.0142.v1)
2021 0021 | Valued Number And Set Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Valued Number And Set”, Preprints 2021, 2021080229 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202108.0229.v1).
2021 0020 | Notion of Valued Set Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Notion of Valued Set”, Preprints 2021, 2021070410 (doi:

10.20944/preprints202107.0410.v1).
2021 0019 | Set And Its Operations Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Set And Its Operations”, Preprints 2021, 2021060508 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202106.0508.v1).
2021 0018 | Metric Dimensions Of Graphs Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Dimensions Of Graphs”, Preprints 2021, 2021060392 (doi:

10.20944/preprints202106.0392.v1).
2021 0017 | New Graph Of Graph Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “New Graph Of Graph”, Preprints 2021, 2021060323 (doi:

10.20944/preprints202106.0323.v1).
2021 0016 | Numbers Based On Edges Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Numbers Based On Edges”, Preprints 2021, 7249

2021060315 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202106.0315.v1).
2021 0015 | Locating And Location Number Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Locating And Location Number”, Preprints 2021, 2021060206 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202106.0206.v1).
2021 0014 | Big Sets Of Vertices Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Big Sets Of Vertices”, Preprints 2021, 2021060189 (doi:

10.20944/preprints202106.0189.v1).
2021 0013 | Matroid And Its Outlines Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Matroid And Its Outlines”, Preprints 2021, 2021060146 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202106.0146.v1).
2021 0012 | Matroid And Its Relations Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Matroid And Its Relations”, Preprints 2021, 2021060080 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202106.0080.v1).
2021 0011 | Metric Number in Dimension Manuscript
Henry Garrett, “Metric Number in Dimension”, Preprints 2021, 2021060004 (doi:

10.20944/preprints202106.0004.v1).
2018 0010 | A Study on Domination in two Fuzzy Models Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “A Study on Domination in two Fuzzy Models”, Preprints 2018, 2018040119 (doi:
10.20944/preprints201804.0119.v2).
2019 0009 | Nikfar Domination Versus Others: Restriction, Extension Theorems and Monstrous Examples Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “Nikfar Domination Versus Others: Restriction, Extension Theorems and

Monstrous Examples”, Preprints 2019, 2019010024 (doi: 10.20944/preprints201901.0024.v3).
2019 0008 | Nikfar Dominations: Definitions, Theorems, and Connections Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “Nikfar Dominations: Definitions, Theorems, and Connections”, ResearchGate

2019 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28955.31526/1).
2019 0007 | Nikfar Domination in Fuzzy Graphs Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “Nikfar Domination in Fuzzy Graphs”, Preprints 2019, 2019010024 (doi:

10.20944/preprints201901.0024.v2).

10.20944/preprints201901.0024.v2).
2018 0005 | The Results on Vertex Domination in Fuzzy Graphs Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “The Results on Vertex Domination in Fuzzy Graphs”, Preprints 2018, 2018040085
7250
(doi: 10.20944/preprints201804.0085.v2).

10.20944/preprints201901.0024.v1).
2019 0003 | Nikfar Domination in Neutrosophic Graphs Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “Nikfar Domination in Neutrosophic Graphs”, Preprints 2019, 2019010025 (doi:

10.20944/preprints201901.0025.v1).
2018 0002 | Vertex Domination in t-Norm Fuzzy Graphs Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “Vertex Domination in t-Norm Fuzzy Graphs”, Preprints 2018, 2018040119 (doi:
10.20944/preprints201804.0119.v1).
2018 0001 | The Results on Vertex Domination in Fuzzy Graphs Manuscript
M. Nikfar, “The Results on Vertex Domination in Fuzzy Graphs”, Preprints 2018, 2018040085
(doi: 10.20944/preprints201804.0085.v1).
Publications: Books
2022 0062 | SuperHyperAlliances Amazon
ASIN : B0BR6YC3HG Publisher : Independently published (December 27, 2022) Language

: English Paperback : 189 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8371488343 Item Weight : 1.24 pounds
Dimensions : 8.5 x 0.45 x 11 inches
ASIN : B0BR7CBTC6 Publisher : Independently published (December 27, 2022) Language
: English Hardcover : 189 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8371494849 Item Weight : 1.21 pounds
2022 0061 | SuperHyperGraphs Amazon
ASIN : B0BR1NHY4Z Publisher : Independently published (December 24, 2022) Language

: English Paperback : 117 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8371090133 Item Weight : 13 ounces
ASIN : B0BQXTHTXY Publisher : Independently published (December 24, 2022)
Language : English Hardcover : 117 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8371093240 Item Weight : 12.6
ounces Dimensions : 8.25 x 0.47 x 11 inches
2022 0060 | Neut. SuperHyperEdges Amazon
ASIN : B0BNH11ZDY Publisher : Independently published (November 27, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BNGZGPP6 Publisher : Independently published (November 27, 2022) Language
: English Hardcover : 107 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8365923980 Item Weight : 11.7 ounces
2022 0059 | Neutrosophic k-Number Amazon
ASIN : B0BF3P5X4N Publisher : Independently published (September 14, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BF2XCDZM Publisher : Independently published (September 14, 2022)
Language : English Hardcover : 159 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8352593394 Item Weight : 1.04
pounds Dimensions : 8.25 x 0.57 x 11 inches
7251
2022 0058 | Neutrosophic Schedule Amazon
ASIN : B0BBJWJJZF Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BBJLPWKH Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language
2022 0057 | Neutrosophic Wheel Amazon
ASIN : B0BBJRHXXG Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BBK3KG82 Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language
2022 0056 | Neutrosophic t-partite Amazon
ASIN : B0BBJLZCHS Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BBJDFGJS Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language
2022 0055 | Neutrosophic Bipartite Amazon
ASIN : B0BB5Z9GHW Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BBGG9RDZ Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language
2022 0054 | Neutrosophic Star Amazon
ASIN : B0BB5ZHSSZ Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BBC4BL9P Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language
2022 0053 | Neutrosophic Cycle Amazon
ASIN : B0BB62NZQK Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BB65QMKQ Publisher : Independently published (August 22, 2022) Language
Dimensions : 8.25 x 1 x 11 inches
2022 0052 | Neutrosophic Path Amazon

ASIN : B0BB67WCXL Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language

: English Paperback : 315 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8847730570 Item Weight : 2 pounds
ASIN : B0BB5Z9FXL Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language
7252
2022 0051 | Neutrosophic Complete Amazon
ASIN : B0BB6191KN Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BB5RRQN7 Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language
2022 0050 | Neutrosophic Dominating Amazon
ASIN : B0BB5QV8WT Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BB61WL9M Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language
2022 0049 | Neutrosophic Resolving Amazon
ASIN : B0BBCJMRH8 Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0BBCB6DFC Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language
2022 0048 | Neutrosophic Stable Amazon
ASIN : B0B7QGTNFW Publisher : Independently published (July 28, 2022) Language

: English Paperback : 133 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8842880348 Item Weight : 14.6 ounces
ASIN : B0B7QJWQ35 Publisher : Independently published (July 28, 2022) Language
2022 0047 | Neutrosophic Total Amazon
ASIN : B0B7GLB23F Publisher : Independently published (July 25, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0B6XVTDYC Publisher : Independently published (July 25, 2022) Language
2022 0046 | Neutrosophic Perfect Amazon
ASIN : B0B7CJHCYZ Publisher : Independently published (July 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0B7C732Z1 Publisher : Independently published (July 22, 2022) Language
2022 0045 | Neutrosophic Joint Set Amazon

ASIN : B0B6L8WJ77 Publisher : Independently published (July 15, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0B6L9GJWR Publisher : Independently published (July 15, 2022) Language
7253
August 30, 0044 | Neutrosophic Duality GLOBAL
2022 KNOWLEDGE -
Publishing
House&Amazon
Neutrosophic Duality, GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House:
GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131
United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0
Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing
House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf).
ASIN : B0B4SJ8Y44 Publisher : Independently published (June 22, 2022) Language
ASIN : B0B46B4CXT Publisher : Independently published (June 22, 2022) Language :
English Hardcover : 115 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8837649981 Item Weight : 12.5 ounces
2022 0043 | Neutrosophic Path-Coloring Amazon
ASIN : B0B3F2BZC4 Publisher : Independently published (June 7, 2022) Language :

English Paperback : 161 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8834894469 Item Weight : 1.08 pounds
ASIN : B0B3FGPGQ3 Publisher : Independently published (June 7, 2022) Language
2022 0042 | Neutrosophic Density Amazon
ASIN : B0B19CDX7W Publisher : Independently published (May 15, 2022) Language

ASIN : B0B14PLPGL Publisher : Independently published (May 15, 2022) Language
2022 0041 | Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Google Commerce Ltd
Publisher Infinite Study Seller Google Commerce Ltd Published on Apr 27, 2022 Pages
30 Features Original pages Best for web, tablet, phone, eReader Language English Genres
Antiques & Collectibles / Reference Content protection This content is DRM free GooglePlay
Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Front Cover Henry
Garrett Infinite Study, 27 Apr 2022 - Antiques & Collectibles - 30 pages GoogleBooks
Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”,
Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 893 10.5281/zenodo.6456413).
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf).
2022 0040 | Neutrosophic Connectivity Amazon
ASIN : B09YQJG2ZV Publisher : Independently published (April 26, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09YQJG2DZ Publisher : Independently published (April 26, 2022) Language
2022 0039 | Neutrosophic Cycles Amazon
ASIN : B09X4KVLQG Publisher : Independently published (April 8, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09X4LZ3HL Publisher : Independently published (April 8, 2022) Language
7254
2022 0038 | Girth in Neutrosophic Graphs Amazon
ASIN : B09WQ5PFV8 Publisher : Independently published (March 29, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09WQQGXPZ Publisher : Independently published (March 29, 2022) Language
2022 0037 | Matching Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Amazon
ASIN : B09W7FT8GM Publisher : Independently published (March 22, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09W4HF99L Publisher : Independently published (March 22, 2022) Language
: English Hardcover : 153 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8437539057 Item Weight : 1 pounds
2022 0036 | Clique Number in Neutrosophic Graph Amazon
ASIN : B09TV82Q7T Publisher : Independently published (March 7, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09TZBPWJG Publisher : Independently published (March 7, 2022) Language
2022 0035 | Independence in Neutrosophic Graphs Amazon
ASIN : B09TF227GG Publisher : Independently published (February 27, 2022) Language

: English Paperback : 149 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8424231681 Item Weight : 1 pounds
ASIN : B09TL1LSKD Publisher : Independently published (February 27, 2022) Language
2022 0034 | Zero Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs Amazon
ASIN : B09SW2YVKB Publisher : Independently published (February 18, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09SWLK7BG Publisher : Independently published (February 18, 2022) Language
2022 0033 | Neutrosophic Quasi-Order Amazon
ASIN : B09S3RXQ5C Publisher : Independently published (February 8, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09S232DQH Publisher : Independently published (February 8, 2022) Language
Jan 29, 2022 0032 | Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs E-publishing&Amazon

Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs, E-publishing:

Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United States
ISBN 978-1-59973-725-6
Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing: Educational
Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United States. ISBN: 978-1-
59973-725-6 (http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf).
ASIN : B0BBCQJQG5 Publisher : Independently published (August7255
8, 2022) Language
ASIN : B0BBC4BJZ5 Publisher : Independently published (August 8, 2022) Language :
English Hardcover : 257 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8847567497 Item Weight : 1.61 pounds
2022 0031 | Neutrosophic Alliances Amazon
ASIN : B09RB5XLVB Publisher : Independently published (January 26, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09R39MTSW Publisher : Independently published (January 26, 2022) Language

2022 0030 | Neutrosophic Hypergraphs Amazon
ASIN : B09PMBKVD4 Publisher : Independently published (January 7, 2022) Language

ASIN : B09PP8VZ3D Publisher : Independently published (January 7, 2022) Language
2022 0029 | Collections of Articles Amazon
-
ASIN : B09PHHDDQK Publisher : Independently published (January 2, 2022) Language
2022 0028 | Collections of Math Amazon
-
ASIN : B09PHBWT5D Publisher : Independently published (January 1, 2022) Language
2022 0027 | Collections of US Amazon
-
ASIN : B09PHBT924 Publisher : Independently published (December 31, 2021) Language
2021 0026 | Neutrosophic Chromatic Number Amazon
ASIN : B09NRD25MG Publisher : Independently published (December 20, 2021) Language

Dimensions : 8.5 x 0.16 x 11 inches Language : English
-
2021 0025 | Simple Ideas Amazon

ASIN : B09MYTN6NT Publisher : Independently published (December 9, 2021) Language

-
2021 0024 | Neutrosophic Graphs Amazon

7256
ASIN : B09MYXVNF9 Publisher : Independently published (December 7, 2021) Language
-
2021 0023 | List Amazon
ASIN : B09M554XCL Publisher : Independently published (November 20, 2021) Language

-
2021 0022 | Theorems Amazon
ASIN : B09KDZXGPR Publisher : Independently published (October 28, 2021) Language

-
2021 0021 | Dimension Amazon
ASIN : B09K2BBQG7 Publisher : Independently published (October 25, 2021) Language :

English Paperback : 55 pages ISBN-13 : 979-8753577146 Item Weight : 7 ounces Dimensions
: 8.5 x 0.13 x 11 inches
-
2021 0020 | Beyond The Graph Theory Amazon
ASIN : B09KDZXGPR Publisher : Independently published (October 28, 2021) Language

-
2021 0019 | Located Heart And Memories Amazon
ASIN : B09F14PL8T Publisher : Independently published (August 31, 2021) Language :

: 8.5 x 0.14 x 11 inches
-
2021 0018 | Number Graphs And Numbers Amazon
ASIN : B099BQRSF8 Publisher : Independently published (July 14, 2021) Language

-
2021 0017 | First Place Is Reserved Amazon
ASIN : B098CWD5PT Publisher : Independently published (June 30, 2021) Language :

: 8.5 x 0.13 x 11 inches
-
2021 0016 | Detail-oriented Groups And Ideas Amazon

ASIN : B098CYYG3Q Publisher : Independently published (June 30, 2021) Language

-
2021 0015 | Definition And Its Necessities Amazon

7257
ASIN : B098DHRJFD Publisher : Independently published (June 30, 2021) Language
-
2021 0014 | Words And Their Directionss Amazon
ASIN : B098CYS8G2 Publisher : Independently published (June 30, 2021) Language :

: 8.5 x 0.16 x 11 inches
-
2021 0013 | Tattooed Heart But Forever Amazon
ASIN : B098CR8HM6 Publisher : Independently published (June 30, 2021) Language

-
2021 0012 | Metric Number In Dimension Amazon
ASIN : B0913597TV Publication date : March 24, 2021 Language : English File size :
28445 KB Text-to-Speech : Enabled Enhanced typesetting : Enabled X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled Print length : 48 pages Lending : Not Enabled Kindle
-
2021 0011 | Domination Theory And Beyond Amazon
ASIN : B098DMMZ87 Publisher : Independently published (June 30, 2021) Language

-
2021 0010 | Vital Glory Amazon
ASIN : B08PVNJYRM Publication date : December 6, 2020 Language : English File

size : 1544 KB Simultaneous device usage : Unlimited Text-to-Speech : Enabled Screen
Reader : Supported Enhanced typesetting : Enabled X-Ray : Not Enabled Word Wise :
Enabled Print length : 24 pages Lending : Enabled Kindle
-
2021 0009 | Análisis de modelos y orientación más allá AmazonUK&MoreBooks

Análisis de modelos y orientación más allá Planteamiento y problemas en dos modelos
Ediciones Nuestro Conocimiento (2021-04-06) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59902-
2 ISBN-10:6203599026EAN:9786203599022Book language:Blurb/Shorttext:El enfoque para la
resolución de problemas es una selección obvia para hacer la investigación y el análisis de la
situación que puede provocar las perspectivas vagas que queremos no ser para extraer ideas
creativas y nuevas que queremos ser. Estudio simultáneamente dos modelos. Este estudio se
basa tanto en la investigación como en la discusión que el autor piensa que puede ser útil
para entender y hacer crecer nuestra fantası́a y la realidad juntas.Publishing house: Ediciones
Nuestro Conocimiento Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com By (author) : Henry 7258 Garrett
Number of pages:64Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available Category: Mathematics Price:39.90
Keywords:Dos modelos, optimización de rutas y transporte, Two Models, Optimizing Routes
and Transportation
MoreBooks
https://www.morebooks.shop/store/gb/book/análisis-de-modelos-y-orientación-más-
allá/isbn/978-620-3-59902-2
Product details Publisher : Ediciones Nuestro Conocimiento (6 April 2021) Language :
Spanish ISBN-10 : 6203599026 ISBN-13 : 978-6203599022 Dimensions : 15 x 0.4 x 22 cm
Paperback:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Análisis-modelos-orientación-allá-Planteamiento/dp/6203599026
2021 0008 | Анализ моделей и руководство за пределами Amazon&MoreBooks
Анализ моделей и руководство за пределами Подход и проблемы в двух моде-

лях Sciencia Scripts (2021-04-06) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59908-4 ISBN-
10:6203599085EAN:9786203599084Book language: Russian Blurb/Shorttext:Подход к реше-
нию проблем является очевидным выбором для проведения исследований и анализа си-
туации, которая может вызвать смутные перспективы, которыми мы не хотим быть для
извлечения творческих и новых идей, которыми мы хотим быть. Я одновременно изучаю
две модели. Это исследование основано как на исследовании, так и на обсуждении, кото-
рое, по мнению автора, может быть полезным для понимания и развития наших фантазий
и реальности вместе.Publishing house: Sciencia Scripts Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com
By (author) : Генри Гарретт Number of pages:68Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available
Category: Mathematics Price:39.90 Keywords:Две модели, оптимизация маршрутов и
транспорта, Two Models, Optimizing Routes and Transportation
MoreBooks
https://www.morebooks.shop/store/gb/book/анализ-моделей-и-руководство-за-
пределами/isbn/978-620-3-59908-4
Анализ моделей и руководство за пределами: Подход и проблемы в двух моделях

(Russian Edition) Publisher : Sciencia Scripts (April 6, 2021) Language : Russian Paperback
: 68 pages ISBN-10 : 6203599085 ISBN-13 : 978-6203599084 Item Weight : 5.3 ounces
Dimensions : 5.91 x 0.16 x 8.66 inches
2021 0007 | Análise e Orientação de Modelos Além Amazon | MoreBooks |

Walmart
Análise e Orientação de Modelos Além Abordagem e Problemas em Dois Modelos Edições
Nosso Conhecimento (2021-04-06 ) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59907-7 ISBN-
10:6203599077EAN:9786203599077Book language:Blurb/Shorttext:A abordagem para resolver
problemas é uma seleção óbvia para fazer pesquisa e análise da situação, que pode trazer
as perspectivas vagas que queremos não ser para extrair idéias criativas e novas idéias que
queremos ser. Eu estudo simultaneamente dois modelos. Este estudo é baseado tanto na
pesquisa como na discussão que o autor pensa que pode ser útil para compreender e fazer crescer
juntos a nossa fantasia e realidade.Publishing house: Edições Nosso Conhecimento Website:
https://sciencia-scripts.com By (author) : Henry Garrett Number of 7259 pages:64Published
on:2021-04-06Stock:Available Category: Mathematics Price:39.90 Keywords:Dois Modelos,
Otimização de Rotas e Transporte, Two Models, Optimizing Routes and Transportation
MoreBooks:
https://www.morebooks.shop/store/gb/book/análise-e-orientação-de-modelos-
além/isbn/978-620-3-59907-7
Henry Garrett Análise e Orientação de Modelos Além (Paperback) About this item
Product details
A abordagem para resolver problemas é uma seleção óbvia para fazer pesquisa e análise da
situação, que pode trazer as perspectivas vagas que queremos não ser para extrair idéias
criativas e novas idéias que queremos ser. Eu estudo simultaneamente dois modelos. Este
estudo é baseado tanto na pesquisa como na discussão que o autor pensa que pode ser útil
para compreender e fazer crescer juntos a nossa fantasia e realidade. Análise e Orientação de
Modelos Além (Paperback) We aim to show you accurate product information. Manufacturers,
suppliers and others provide what you see here, and we have not verified it. See our disclaimer
Specifications
Language Portuguese Publisher KS Omniscriptum Publishing Book Format Paperback Number
of Pages 64 Author Henry Garrett Title Análise e Orientação de Modelos Além ISBN-13
9786203599077 Publication Date April, 2021 Assembled Product Dimensions (L x W x H) 9.00
x 6.00 x 1.50 Inches ISBN-10 6203599077 Walmart
Análise e Orientação de Modelos Além: Abordagem e Problemas em Dois Modelos

(Portuguese Edition) Publisher : Edições Nosso Conhecimento (April 6, 2021) Language
: Portuguese Paperback : 64 pages ISBN-10 : 6203599077 ISBN-13 : 978-6203599077 Item
Weight : 3.67 ounces Dimensions : 5.91 x 0.15 x 8.66 inches
2021 0006 | Analizy modelowe i wytyczne wykraczaja˛ce poza Amazon&MoreBooks
Analizy modelowe i wytyczne wykraczaja˛ce poza Podejście i problemy w dwóch

modelach Wydawnictwo Nasza Wiedza (2021-04-06 ) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-
59906-0 ISBN-10:6203599069EAN:9786203599060Book language:Blurb/Shorttext:Podejście do
rozwia˛zywania problemów jest oczywistym wyborem do prowadzenia badań i analizowania
sytuacji, które moga˛ wywo lywać niejasne perspektywy, których nie chcemy dla wydobycia
kreatywnych i nowych pomys lów, które chcemy. I jednocześnie studiować dwa modele.
Badanie to oparte jest zarówno na badaniach jak i dyskusji, które zdaniem autora moga˛
być przydatne do zrozumienia i rozwoju naszych fantazji i rzeczywistości razem.Publishing
house: Wydawnictwo Nasza Wiedza Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com By (author) : Henry
Garrett Number of pages:64Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available Category: Mathematics
Price:39.90 Keywords:Dwa modele, optymalizacja tras i transportu, Two Models, Optimizing
Routes and Transportation
MoreBooks:
https://www.morebooks.shop/store/gb/book/analizy-modelowe-i-wytyczne-wykraczaja˛ce-
poza/isbn/978-620-3-59906-0
Analizy modelowe i wytyczne wykraczaja˛ce poza: Podejście i problemy w dwóch modelach
(Polish Edition) Publisher : Wydawnictwo Nasza Wiedza (April 6, 2021) Language : Polish
Paperback : 64 pages ISBN-10 : 6203599069 ISBN-13 : 978-6203599060 Item Weight :
3.67 ounces Dimensions : 5.91 x 0.15 x 8.66 inches
2021 0005 | Modelanalyses en begeleiding daarna Amazon&MoreBooks

Modelanalyses en begeleiding daarna Aanpak en problemen in twee modellen
Uitgeverij Onze Kennis (2021-04-06 ) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59905-3
ISBN-10:6203599050EAN:9786203599053Book language:Blurb/Shorttext:De aanpak voor het
oplossen van problemen is een voor de hand liggende keuze voor het doen van onderzoek en het
analyseren van de situatie die de vage perspectieven kan oproepen die we niet willen zijn voor
het extraheren van creatieve en nieuwe ideeën die we willen zijn. Ik bestudeer tegelijkertijd twee
modellen. Deze studie is gebaseerd op zowel onderzoek als discussie waarvan de auteur denkt dat
ze nuttig kunnen zijn voor het begrijpen en laten groeien van onze fantasieën en de werkelijkheid
samen.Publishing house: Uitgeverij Onze Kennis Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com 7260 By
(author) : Henry Garrett Number of pages:64Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available Category:
Mathematics Price:39.90 Keywords:Twee modellen, optimalisering van routes en transport,
Two Models, Optimizing Routes and Transportation
MoreBooks
Modelanalyses en begeleiding daarna: Aanpak en problemen in twee modellen (Dutch
Edition) Publisher : Uitgeverij Onze Kennis (April 6, 2021) Language : Dutch Paperback
2021 0004 | Analisi dei modelli e guida oltre Amazon | MoreBooks |

Walmart
Analisi dei modelli e guida oltre Approccio e problemi in due modelli Edizioni
Sapienza (2021-04-06 ) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59904-6 ISBN-
10:6203599042EAN:9786203599046Book language:Blurb/Shorttext:L’approccio per risolvere
i problemi è una selezione ovvia per fare ricerca e analisi della situazione che può suscitare
le prospettive vaghe che non vogliamo essere per estrarre idee creative e nuove che vogliamo
essere. Studio contemporaneamente due modelli. Questo studio si basa sia sulla ricerca che
sulla discussione che l’autore pensa possa essere utile per capire e far crescere insieme la nostra
fantasia e la realtà.Publishing house: Edizioni Sapienza Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com
By (author) : Henry Garrett Number of pages:60Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available
Category: Mathematics Price:39.90 Keywords:Due modelli, ottimizzazione dei percorsi e del
trasporto, Two Models, Optimizing Routes and Transportation
MoreBooks Henry Garrett Analisi dei modelli e guida oltre (Paperback) About this item
Product details
L’approccio per risolvere i problemi è una selezione ovvia per fare ricerca e analisi della
situazione che può suscitare le prospettive vaghe che non vogliamo essere per estrarre idee
creative e nuove che vogliamo essere. Studio contemporaneamente due modelli. Questo studio
si basa sia sulla ricerca che sulla discussione che l’autore pensa possa essere utile per capire e far
crescere insieme la nostra fantasia e la realtà. Analisi dei modelli e guida oltre (Paperback) We
aim to show you accurate product information. Manufacturers, suppliers and others provide
what you see here, and we have not verified it. See our disclaimer Specifications
Publisher KS Omniscriptum Publishing Book Format Paperback Number of Pages 60 Author
Henry Garrett Title Analisi dei modelli e guida oltre ISBN-13 9786203599046 Publication Date
April, 2021 Assembled Product Dimensions (L x W x H) 9.00 x 6.00 x 1.50 Inches ISBN-10
6203599042 Walmart
Analisi dei modelli e guida oltre: Approccio e problemi in due modelli (Italian Edition)
Publisher : Edizioni Sapienza (April 6, 2021) Language : Italian Paperback : 60 pages
ISBN-10 : 6203599042 ISBN-13 : 978-6203599046 Item Weight : 3.53 ounces Dimensions
: 5.91 x 0.14 x 8.66 inches
2021 0003 | Analyses de modèles et orientations au-delà Amazon | MoreBooks |

Walmart
Analyses de modèles et orientations au-delà Approche et problèmes dans deux
modèles Editions Notre Savoir (2021-04-06 ) eligible for voucher eligible for voucher
ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59903-9 ISBN-10:6203599034EAN:9786203599039Book language: French
Blurb/Shorttext:L’approche pour résoudre les problèmes est une sélection évidente pour faire
la recherche et l’analyse de la situation qui peut éliciter les perspectives vagues que nous ne
voulons pas être pour extraire des idées créatives et nouvelles que nous voulons être. J’étudie
simultanément deux modèles. Cette étude est basée à la fois sur la recherche et la discussion,
ce qui, selon l’auteur, peut être utile pour comprendre et développer nos fantasmes et la réalité
ensemble.Publishing house: Editions Notre Savoir Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com
7261 By
(author) : Henry Garrett Number of pages:64Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available Category:
Mathematics Price:39.90 Keywords:Two Models, Optimizing Routes and Transportation, Deux
modèles, optimisation des itinéraires et des transports
MoreBooks:
https://www.morebooks.shop/store/gb/book/analyses-de-modèles-et-orientations-au-
delà/isbn/978-620-3-59903-9
Henry Garrett Analyses de modèles et orientations au-delà (Paperback) About this item
Product details
L’approche pour résoudre les problèmes est une sélection évidente pour faire la recherche et
l’analyse de la situation qui peut éliciter les perspectives vagues que nous ne voulons pas être
pour extraire des idées créatives et nouvelles que nous voulons être. J’étudie simultanément
deux modèles. Cette étude est basée à la fois sur la recherche et la discussion, ce qui, selon
l’auteur, peut être utile pour comprendre et développer nos fantasmes et la réalité ensemble.
Analyses de modèles et orientations au-delà (Paperback) We aim to show you accurate product
information. Manufacturers, suppliers and others provide what you see here, and we have not
verified it. See our disclaimer Specifications
Language French Publisher KS Omniscriptum Publishing Book Format Paperback Number of
Pages 64 Author Henry Garrett Title Analyses de modèles et orientations au-delà ISBN-13
9786203599039 Publication Date April, 2021 Assembled Product Dimensions (L x W x H) 9.00
x 6.00 x 1.50 Inches ISBN-10 6203599034 Walmart
Analyses de modèles et orientations au-delà: Approche et problèmes dans deux modèles

(French Edition) Publisher : Editions Notre Savoir (April 6, 2021) Language : French
3.67 ounces Dimensions : 5.91 x 0.15 x 8.66 inches
2021 0002 | Modell-Analysen und Anleitungen darüber hinaus Amazon | MoreBooks |

Walmart | eBay
eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-59901-5 ISBN-
10:6203599018EAN:9786203599015Book language: German Blurb/Shorttext:Die
Herangehensweise zur Lösung von Problemen ist eine offensichtliche Auswahl für die
Forschung und Analyse der Situation, die die vagen Perspektiven, die wir nicht sein wollen,
für die Extraktion von kreativen und neuen Ideen, die wir sein wollen, hervorbringen kann.
Ich studiere gleichzeitig zwei Modelle. Diese Studie basiert sowohl auf der Forschung als
auch auf der Diskussion, von der der Autor denkt, dass sie für das Verständnis und das
Zusammenwachsen unserer Fantasie und Realität nützlich sein kann.Publishing house: Verlag
Unser Wissen Website: https://sciencia-scripts.com By (author) : Henry Garrett Number 7262
of pages:68Published on:2021-04-06Stock:Available Category: Mathematics Price:39.90

Keywords:Zwei Modelle, Optimierung von Routen und Transport, Two Models, Optimizing
Routes and Transportation
MoreBooksHenry Garrett Modell-Analysen und Anleitungen darüber hinaus (Paperback)
About this item
Product details
Die Herangehensweise zur Lösung von Problemen ist eine offensichtliche Auswahl für die
Forschung und Analyse der Situation, die die vagen Perspektiven, die wir nicht sein wollen,
für die Extraktion von kreativen und neuen Ideen, die wir sein wollen, hervorbringen kann.
Ich studiere gleichzeitig zwei Modelle. Diese Studie basiert sowohl auf der Forschung als
auch auf der Diskussion, von der der Autor denkt, dass sie für das Verständnis und das
Zusammenwachsen unserer Fantasie und Realität nützlich sein kann. Modell-Analysen und
Anleitungen darüber hinaus (Paperback) We aim to show you accurate product information.
Manufacturers, suppliers and others provide what you see here, and we have not verified it.
See our disclaimer Specifications
Language German Publisher KS Omniscriptum Publishing Book Format Paperback Number
of Pages 68 Author Henry Garrett Title Modell-Analysen und Anleitungen darüber hinaus
ISBN-13 9786203599015 Publication Date April, 2021 Assembled Product Dimensions (L x W
x H) 9.00 x 6.00 x 1.50 Inches ISBN-10 6203599018
Walmart
Seller assumes all responsibility for this listing. Item specifics Condition: New: A new, unread,
unused book in perfect condition with no missing or damaged pages. See the ... Read
moreabout the condition ISBN: 9786203599015 EAN: 9786203599015 Publication Year: 2021
Type: Textbook Format: Paperback Language: German Publication Name: Modell-Analysen
Und Anleitungen Daruber Hinaus Item Height: 229mm Author: Henry Garrett Publisher:
Verlag Unser Wissen Item Width: 152mm Subject: Mathematics Item Weight: 113g Number of
Pages: 68 Pages About this product Product Information Die Herangehensweise zur Loesung
von Problemen ist eine offensichtliche Auswahl fur die Forschung und Analyse der Situation, die
die vagen Perspektiven, die wir nicht sein wollen, fur die Extraktion von kreativen und neuen
Ideen, die wir sein wollen, hervorbringen kann. Ich studiere gleichzeitig zwei Modelle. Diese
Studie basiert sowohl auf der Forschung als auch auf der Diskussion, von der der Autor denkt,
dass sie fur das Verstandnis und das Zusammenwachsen unserer Fantasie und Realitat nutzlich
sein kann. Product Identifiers Publisher Verlag Unser Wissen ISBN-13 9786203599015 eBay
Product ID (ePID) 11049032082 Product Key Features Publication Name Modell-Analysen
Und Anleitungen Daruber Hinaus Format Paperback Language German Subject Mathematics
Publication Year 2021 Type Textbook Author Henry Garrett Number of Pages 68 Pages
Dimensions Item Height 229mm Item Width 152mm Item Weight 113g Additional Product
Features Title_Author Henry Garrett
eBay
Modell-Analysen und Anleitungen darüber hinaus: Ansatz und Probleme in zwei Modellen
(German Edition) Publisher : Verlag Unser Wissen (April 6, 2021) Language : German
3.99 ounces Dimensions : 5.91 x 0.16 x 8.66 inches Paperback
2021 0001 | Model Analyses and Guidance Beyond Amazon&MoreBooks

Model Analyses and Guidance Beyond Approach and Problems in Two Models LAP
LAMBERT Academic Publishing (2020-12-02 ) eligible for voucher ISBN-13: 978-620-3-19506-
4 ISBN-10:6203195065EAN:9786203195064Book language: English Blurb/Shorttext:Approach
for solving problems is an obvious selection for doing research and analysis the situation
which may elicit the vague perspectives which we want not to be for extracting creative
and new ideas which we want to be. I simultaneously study two models. This study is based
both research and discussion which the author thinks that may be useful for understanding
and growing our fantasizing and reality together.Publishing house: LAP LAMBERT
Academic Publishing Website: https://www.lap-publishing.com/ By (author)
7263 : Henry Garrett
Number of pages:52Published on:2020-12-02Stock:Available Category: Mathematics Price:39.90

Keywords:Two Models, Optimizing Routes and Transportation
MoreBooks
Model Analyses and Guidance Beyond: Approach and Problems in Two Models Publisher
: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing (December 2, 2020) Language : English Paperback
Workshops and Seminars
2015 LATEX Workshop SRTTU
I received a certificate for this workshop

In this course, we got acquainted with various topics in the field of this software
2015 Geogebra Workshop SRTTU
I received a certificate for this workshop

In this course, we got acquainted with various topics in the field of this software
Participating in Seminars
I’ve participated in all virtual conferences which are listed below [Some of them without selective process].
–https://web.math.princeton.edu/ pds/onlinetalks/talks.html
...
Also, I’ve participated in following events [Some of them without selective process]:
-The Hidden NORMS seminar

-Talk Math With Your Friends (TMWYF)
-MATHEMATICS COLLOQUIUM: https://www.csulb.edu/mathematics-statistics/mathematics-colloquium
-Lathisms: Cafe Con Leche
-Big Math network
...
I’m in mailing list in following [Some of them without selective process] organizations:
-[Algebraic-graph-theory] AGT Seminar (lists-uwaterloo-ca)

-Combinatorics Lectures Online (https://web.math.princeton.edu/ pds/onlinetalks/talks.html)
-Women in Combinatorics
-CMSA-Seminar (unsw-au)
-OURFA2M2 Online Undergraduate Resource Fair for the Advancement and Alliance of Marginalized Mathematicians
...
Social Accounts
I’ve listed my accounts below.
-My website [Covering all my contributions containing articles and books as free access to download with PDF
extension and more]: https://drhenrygarrett.wordpress.com
-Amazon [Some of my all books, here]: https://www.amzn.com/author/drhenrygarrett

7264
-Twitter: @DrHenryGarrett (www.twitter.com/DrHenryGarrett)
– ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Henry-Garrett-2
-Academia: https://independent.academia.edu/drhenrygarrett/
-Scribd: https://www.scribd.com/user/596815491/Henry-Garrett
-Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=enuser=SUjFCmcAAAAJviewo p = listw orkssortby = pubdate
− LinkedIn : https : //www.linkedin.com/in/drhenrygarrett/

References
2019-2022 Dr. Mohammad Hamidi PNU
Department of Mathematics, Payame Noor University, P. O. Box: 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.

E-mail address: m.hamidi@pnu.ac.ir
2019-2022 Dr. Akefe Radfar 7265

PNU
Department of Mathematics, Payame Noor University, P. O. Box: 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.

E-mail address: radfar@pnu.ac.ir
2014-2016 Dr. Hamidreza Maimani SRTTU
Mathematics Section, Department of Basic Sciences, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training

University, P.O. Box 16785-163, Tehran, Iran, and School of Mathematics, Institute for Re-
search in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), P.O. Box 19395-5746, Tehran, Iran.
E-mail address: maimani@ipm.ir
2014-2016 Dr. Ali Zaeembashi SRTTU
Mathematics Section, Department of Basic Sciences, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training

University, P.O. Box 16785-163, Tehran, Iran.
E-mail address: azaeembashi@sru.ac.ir
2010-2013 Dr. Seyed Ali Moosavi University of Qom
Mathematics Section, Department of Basic Sciences, Qom University, Qom, Iran.

E-mail address: s.a.mousavi@qom.ac.ir
DrHenryGarrett.wordpress.com · Twitter.com/DrHenryGarrett

Super Hyper Forcing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Super Hyper Forcing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SuperHyperForcing

Ideas | Approaches | Accessibility | Availability

Dr. Henry Garrett

SuperHyperForcing and neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing. With researches 3

perForcing. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them 9

many applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is 33

perVertices (whereas SuperHyperVertices in V (G) \ S are colored white) such 38

if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of a black SuperHyperVertex. 41

to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyperNeighbor of 47

HyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white 53

The first Expression, holds if S is an “δ−SuperHyperOffensive”. And the 59

N (s)|neutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|neutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, holds 65

of “SuperHyperForcing”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 71

the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on SuperHyperForcing. 83

For the sake of having neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, there’s a need to 91

Graph” if the intended Table holds. And SuperHyperForcing are redefined 97

SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 103

sophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 127

to choose another model [it’s said to be neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to 141

SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHy- 147

Keywords: (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph, (Neutrosophic) SuperHyper- 159

Forcing, Cancer’s Recognitions 160

AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 161

Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then a “SuperHyperForcing” Z(N SHG) for a 185

converted to a black SuperHyperVertex if it is the only white SuperHyper- 190

rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted to a black SuperHyperVertex 196

applications of “the color-change rule”: a white SuperHyperVertex is converted 202

s ∈ S : |S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ, |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. 214

Neighbors of s ∈ S : |S ∩N (s)|neutrosophic > |S ∩(V \N (s))|neutrosophic +δ, |S ∩ 220

having neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion 226

Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic Super- 232

Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The Minimum Values of Its 237

the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on SuperHyperForcing. 246

a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “neutrosophic SuperHyper- 252

some neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 258

common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 276

The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutro- 282

could be fantasized by a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, 302

are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths 308

theory are proposed. 314

Forcing, Cancer’s Recognitions 316

Forcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recogni- 322

[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And

Article #99 329

[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s

[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing:

[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, 360

view Heights, Ohio 43212 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-725-6 362

Duality” and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing 368

[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL KNOW-

[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: 377

coloring, Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) 389

offensive alliance, t-offensive alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, 395

using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 407

of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in 419

Ref. [HG6] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and Super- 425

Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic 431

about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 437

HG1 [1] Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neut- 457

tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 459

Henry Garrett, “”, Preprints 2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/pre- 465

HG3 [3] Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 467

Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive Super- 468