A Research On Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/368291112
A Research On Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As Hyper Covering Versus
Super separations-II
Preprint · February 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
285 PUBLICATIONS 2,862 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Featured Articles View project
Number Graphs And Numbers View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 06 February 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA
A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 2
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and 3
Hamiltonian Sets As Hyper Covering Versus Super 4
separations-II 5
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 7
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 8
ABSTRACT 9
In this research, assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then an Extreme SuperHyperCycle 10
C(N SHG) for an extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum extreme 11
cardinality of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality of the extreme 12
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive extreme sequence of extreme SuperHyperEdges 13
and extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the extreme SuperHyperCycle 14
and either all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; a 15
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 16
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 17
SuperHyperEdges of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic cardinality 18
consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 19
that they form the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and either all neutrosophic 20
SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; an Extreme 21
SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for an extreme SuperHyperGraph 22
N SHG : (V, E) is the extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the extreme coefficients 23
defined as the extreme number of the maximum extreme cardinality of the extreme 24
SuperHyperEdges of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality 25
consecutive extreme SuperHyperEdges and extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 26
form the extreme SuperHyperCycle and either all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all 27
extreme SuperHyperEdges; and the extreme power is corresponded to its extreme 28
coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for a 29
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic 30
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 31
neutrosophic number of the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 32
SuperHyperEdges of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic cardinality 33
SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; and the neutrosophic power 36
is corresponded to its neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme R-SuperHyperCycle 37
C(N SHG) for an extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum extreme 38
cardinality of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality of the extreme 39
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive extreme sequence of extreme SuperHyperEdges 40
and extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the extreme SuperHyperCycle 41
and either all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; a 42
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 43
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 44
SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic cardinality 45
SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; an Extreme 48
R-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for an extreme 49
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 50
extreme coefficients defined as the extreme number of the maximum extreme cardinality 51
of the extreme SuperHyperVertices of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme 52
cardinality consecutive extreme SuperHyperEdges and extreme SuperHyperVertices 53
such that they form the extreme SuperHyperCycle and either all extreme 54
SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; and the extreme power is 55
corresponded to its extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 56
SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 57
N SHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the neutrosophic 58
coefficients defined as the neutrosophic number of the maximum neutrosophic 59
cardinality of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 60
of high neutrosophic cardinality consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 61
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the neutrosophic 62
SuperHyperCycle and either all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic 63
SuperHyperEdges; and the neutrosophic power is corresponded to its neutrosophic 64
coefficient. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then an δ−SuperHyperCycle is a 65
neutrosophic kind of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle such that either of the following 66
expressions hold for the neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 67
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 68
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 69
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic 70
kind of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle such that either of the following neutrosophic 71
expressions hold for the neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 72
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < 73
|S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, holds if S is a Neutrosophic 74
δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds if S is a Neutrosophic 75
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. A basic familiarity with neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 76
theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 77
Keywords: neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, (neutrosophic) SuperHyperCycle, 78
Cancer’s neutrosophic Recognition 79
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 80
1 Wondering open Problems But As The Directions 81
To Forming The Motivations 82
In what follows, some “Neutrosophic problems” and some “Neutrosophic questions” are 83
Neutrosophicly proposed. 84
The SuperHyperCycle and the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle are Neutrosophicly 85
defined on a real-world Neutrosophic application, titled “Cancer’s neutrosophic 86
recognitions”. 87
Question 1.1. Which the else neutrosophic SuperHyperModels could be defined based 88
on Cancer’s neutrosophic recognitions? 89
Question 1.2. Are there some neutrosophic SuperHyperNotions related to 90
SuperHyperCycle and the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle? 91
Question 1.3. Are there some Neutrosophic Algorithms to be defined on the 92
neutrosophic SuperHyperModels to compute them Neutrosophicly? 93
Question 1.4. Which the neutrosophic SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 94
SuperHyperCycle and the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle? 95
Problem 1.5. The SuperHyperCycle and the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle do 96
Neutrosophicly a neutrosophic SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s neutrosophic 97
recognitions and they’re based Neutrosophicly on neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, are 98
there else Neutrosophicly? 99
Problem 1.6. Which the fundamental Neutrosophic SuperHyperNumbers are related to 100
these Neutrosophic SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 101
Problem 1.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s neutrosophic 102
recognitions concerning the multiple types of neutrosophic SuperHyperNotions? 103
2 The Departures on The Theoretical Results 104
Toward Theoretical Motivations 105
The previous neutrosophic approaches apply on the upcoming neutrosophic results on 106
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 107
Proposition 2.1. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 108
Then a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle-style with the maximum neutrosophic 109
SuperHyperCardinality is an neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the interior neutrosophic 110
SuperHyperVertices. 111
Proposition 2.2. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 112
Then a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 113
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with only no neutrosophic exceptions in the 114
form of interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique neutrosophic 115
SuperHyperEdges not excluding only any interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from 116
the neutrosophic unique SuperHyperEdges. a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle has 117
the neutrosophic number of all the interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Also, 118
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycle = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = az s + bz t .
Example 2.3. In the Figure (1), the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 119
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 120
neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (1), is the SuperHyperCycle. 121
Proposition 2.4. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 122
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with only no neutrosophic exceptions on the 124
form of interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the same neutrosophic 125
SuperHyperNeighborhoods not excluding any neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. a 126
neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle has the neutrosophic half number of all the 127
Figure 1. a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of neutrosophic

SuperHyperCycle in the Example (2.3)
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges in the terms of the maximum neutrosophic cardinality. 128
Also, 129

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Example 2.5. In the Figure (2), the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 130
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 131
in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (2), is the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 132
Proposition 2.6. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 133
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, corresponded to a neutrosophic 135
SuperHyperEdge. a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle has the neutrosophic number 136
of the neutrosophic cardinality of the one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Also, 137

= {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
X
= z |E|Neutrosophic Cardinality | E:∈EESHG:(V,E) .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycle = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 , . . . .

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = z s + z t +, . . . .
Figure 2. a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the neutrosophic Notions of

neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in the neutrosophic Example (2.5)
Example 2.7. In the Figure (3), the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 138
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 139
by the Algorithm in previous neutrosophic result, of the neutrosophic 140
SuperHyperVertices of the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 141
the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (3), is the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 142
Proposition 2.8. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 143
ESHB : (V, E). Then a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic 144
SuperHyperSet of the interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with no neutrosophic 145
exceptions in the form of interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices titled neutrosophic 146
SuperHyperNeighbors. a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle has the neutrosophic 147
maximum number of on neutrosophic cardinality of the minimum SuperHyperPart minus 148
those have common neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors and not unique neutrosophic 149
SuperHyperNeighbors. Also, 150

min |PESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= {E2i−1 }i=1 .
= z min |PESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycle = {Vi }si=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = az s .
Example 2.9. In the neutrosophic Figure (4), the connected neutrosophic 151
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is neutrosophic highlighted and neutrosophic 152
featured. The obtained neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the neutrosophic Algorithm in 153
previous neutrosophic result, of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 154
neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the neutrosophic 155
SuperHyperModel (4), is the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 156
Proposition 2.10. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 157
Figure 3. a neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the neutrosophic Notions of

neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in the neutrosophic Example (2.7)
Figure 4. a neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite neutrosophic Associated to the neutro-

sophic Notions of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in the Example (2.9)
Figure 5. a neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of neutro-

sophic SuperHyperCycle in the Example (2.11)
ESHM : (V, E). Then a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic 158
SuperHyperSet of the interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with only no 159
neutrosophic exception in the neutrosophic form of interior neutrosophic 160
SuperHyperVertices from a neutrosophic SuperHyperPart and only no exception in the 161
form of interior SuperHyperVertices from another SuperHyperPart titled 162
“SuperHyperNeighbors” with neglecting and ignoring more than some of them aren’t 163
SuperHyperNeighbors to all. a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle has the neutrosophic 164
maximum number on all the neutrosophic summation on the neutrosophic cardinality of 165
the all neutrosophic SuperHyperParts form some SuperHyperEdges minus those make 166
neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some not all or not unique. Also, 167

min |PESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= {E2i−1 }i=1 .
= z min |PESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycle = {Vi }si=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = az s .
Example 2.11. In the Figure (5), the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 168
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and neutrosophic featured. The obtained neutrosophic 169
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous neutrosophic result, of the neutrosophic 170
SuperHyperVertices of the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 171
ESHM : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (5), is the neutrosophic 172
SuperHyperCycle. 173
Proposition 2.12. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 174
ESHW : (V, E). Then a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic 175
SuperHyperSet of the interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, excluding the 176
neutrosophic SuperHyperCenter, with only no exception in the form of interior 177
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from same neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 178
exclusion on neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them and not all. a 179
neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle has the neutrosophic maximum number on all the 180
Figure 6. a neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel neutrosophic Associated to the neutrosophic

Notions of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in the neutrosophic Example (2.13)
neutrosophic number of all the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges don’t have common 181
neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors. Also, 182

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Example 2.13. In the neutrosophic Figure (6), the connected neutrosophic 183
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 184
obtained neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 185
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 186
ESHW : (V, E), in the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (6), is the neutrosophic 187
3 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 189
Results But As The Initial Motivation 190
For the SuperHyperCycle, extreme SuperHyperCycle, and the neutrosophic 191
SuperHyperCycle, some general results are introduced. 192
Remark 3.1. Let remind that the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is “redefined” on the 193
positions of the alphabets. 194
Corollary 3.2. Assume extreme SuperHyperCycle. Then 195
N eutrosophic SuperHyperCycle =
{theSuperHyperCycleof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensiveSuperHyper
Clique|neutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperCycle. }
plus one extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 196
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 197
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 198
Corollary 3.3. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 199
of the alphabet. Then the notion of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and SuperHyperCycle 200
coincide. 201
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 203
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle if and only if it’s a SuperHyperCycle. 204
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 206
SuperHyperCycle if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperCycle. 207
Corollary 3.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 208
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is its 209
SuperHyperCycle and reversely. 210
Corollary 3.7. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperCycle, 211
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 212
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is its 213
SuperHyperCycle and reversely. 214
Corollary 3.8. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its neutrosophic 215
SuperHyperCycle isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperCycle isn’t well-defined. 216
Corollary 3.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 217
its neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperCycle 218
isn’t well-defined. 219
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 221
Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle isn’t well-defined if and only if its 222
SuperHyperCycle isn’t well-defined. 223
Corollary 3.11. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its neutrosophic 224
SuperHyperCycle is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperCycle is well-defined. 225
Corollary 3.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 226
Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperCycle 227
is well-defined. 228
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 230
Then its neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperCycle 231
is well-defined. 232
Proposition 3.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 233
is 234
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 235
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 236
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 237
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 238
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 239
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 240
Proposition 3.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 241
∅ is 242
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 243
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 244
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 245
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 246
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 247
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 248
Proposition 3.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 249
independent SuperHyperSet is 250
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 251
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 252
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 253
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 254
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 255
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 256
Proposition 3.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 257
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a maximal 258
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 259
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 260
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 261
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 262
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 263
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 264
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 265
Proposition 3.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 266
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 267
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 268
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 269
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 270
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 271
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 272
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 273
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 274
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 276
(i) : the SuperHyperCycle; 277
(ii) : the SuperHyperCycle; 278
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperCycle; 279
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperCycle; 280
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperCycle; 281
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperCycle. 282
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 283
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 284
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 286
(i) : the dual SuperHyperCycle; 287
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperCycle; 288
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperCycle; 289
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperCycle; 290
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperCycle; 291
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperCycle. 292
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 293
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 296
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 297
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 298
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 299
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 303
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 304
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 305
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 308
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 309
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 310
is a 311
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 315
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 316
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 317
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 320
number of 321
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 325
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 326
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 327
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 328
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 329
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 330
Proposition 3.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 332
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 333
(iv) : SuperHyperCycle; 337
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 338
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 339
Proposition 3.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 340
number is at most O(ESHG) and the neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 341
Proposition 3.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 342
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the neutrosophic number is 343
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 344
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 348
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

(vi) : connected ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 350
Proposition 3.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 351
The number is 0 and the neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in 352
the setting of dual 353
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 357
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 358
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 359
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 361
SuperHyperCycle/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is O(ESHG : (V, E)) 363
and the neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a dual 364
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 368
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 369
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 370
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 372
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the neutrosophic number is 373
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 374
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

(vi) : connected ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 380
Proposition 3.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 381
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 382
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 383
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 384
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 385
Proposition 3.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 386
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 387
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 388
(ii) vx ∈ E. 389
Proposition 3.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 390
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle, then 391
(i) S is SuperHyperDominating set; 392
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 393
Proposition 3.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 394
Then 395
(i) Γ ≤ O; 396
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 397
Proposition 3.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 398
which is connected. Then 399
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 400
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 401
Proposition 3.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 402
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 403
SuperHyperCycle; 404
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 405
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 406
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 407
a dual SuperHyperCycle. 408
Proposition 3.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 409
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 410
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 411
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 412
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 413
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 414
dual SuperHyperCycle. 415
Proposition 3.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperCycle. Then 416
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 417
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 419
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 420
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 421
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 422
Proposition 3.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperCycle. Then 424
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 425
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 427
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 428
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 429
Proposition 3.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 431
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperCycle; 432
(ii) Γ = 1; 433
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 434
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperCycle. 435
Proposition 3.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 436
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 437
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 438
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 439
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 440
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 441
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 442
Proposition 3.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 443
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 444
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 446
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 447
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 448
Proposition 3.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 450
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 451
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 452
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 453
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 454
Proposition 3.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of neutrosophic 456
SuperHyperStars with common neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 457
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 458
SuperHyperCycle for N SHF; 459
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 460
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 461
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 462
SuperHyperCycle for N SHF : (V, E). 463
Proposition 3.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 464
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 465
SuperHyperSet. Then 466
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 467
SuperHyperCycle for N SHF; 468
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 469

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 470
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperCycle for 471
N SHF : (V, E). 472
Proposition 3.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 473
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 474
SuperHyperSet. Then 475
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle 476
for N SHF : (V, E); 477
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 478

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 479
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperCycle for 480
N SHF : (V, E). 481
Then following statements hold; 483
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 484
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 485
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 487
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperDefensive 488
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 492
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 493
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 495
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperPowerful 496
Proposition 3.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 498
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 499
statements hold; 500
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 501
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 502
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 503
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 505
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 507
r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 508
Proposition 3.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 509
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 510
statements hold; 511
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 512
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 514
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 516
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 518
r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 519
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 521
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 522
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 523
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 525
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 527
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 530
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 532
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 533
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 534
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 536
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 538
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle; 539
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 541
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperCycle. 543
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 545
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 547
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 549
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 552
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperCycle. 554
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 556
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 558
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 560
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperCycle. 563
4 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 564
Motivation Of This Research 565
In this research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of motivations. I try 566
to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. 567
Question 4.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 568
find the “ amount of SuperHyperCycle” of either individual of cells or the groups of cells 569
based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 570
SuperHyperCycle” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of cells? 571
Question 4.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 572
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 573
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 574
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 575
SuperHyperCycle” and “neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle” on “SuperHyperGraph” and 576
“neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. 577
5 Preliminaries Of This Research On the Redeemed 578
Ways 579
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this research, is presented. Also, 580
the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 581
Definition 5.1 (neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [38],Definition 2.1,p.1). 582
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 of 583
+
]− 0, 1 [. 584
Definition 5.2 (Single Valued neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [38],Definition 2.2,p.2). 585
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 5.3. 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 5.4. 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 5.5 (neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [38],Definition 586
2.5,p.2). 587
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 588
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 589
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 590
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 591
1, 2, . . . , n); 592
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets of V ; 593
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 594
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 595
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 596
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 597
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 598
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 599
(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 . 600
Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the neutrosophic 601
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 602
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 603
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the neutrosophic 604
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 605
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 606
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the neutrosophic 607
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 608
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 609
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 610
Definition 5.6 (Characterization of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 611
(Ref. [38],Definition 2.7,p.3). 612
Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 613
The neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the neutrosophic 614
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 615
could be characterized as follow-up items. 616
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 617
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 618
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 619
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 620
HyperEdge; 621
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 622
SuperEdge; 623
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 624
SuperHyperEdge. 625
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 626
types of general forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 627
Definition 5.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [38], Definition 2.7, p.3). 628
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 629
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 630
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 631
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 632
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 633
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 634
Definition 5.8. 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} (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 5.9. 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 5.10. (General Forms of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 635
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 636
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 637
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 638
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 639
1, 2, . . . , n); 640
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued neutrosophic subsets of V ; 641
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 642
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 643
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 644
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 645
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 646
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 647
Here the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the neutrosophic 648
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 649
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 650
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the neutrosophic 651
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 652
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 653
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the neutrosophic 654
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 655
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 656
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 657
Definition 5.11 (Characterization of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 658
(Ref. [38],Definition 2.7,p.3). 659
Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 660
The neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the neutrosophic 661
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 662
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 664
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 665
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 666
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 667
HyperEdge; 668
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 669
SuperEdge; 670
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 671
SuperHyperEdge. 672
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 673
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 674
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 675
Definition 5.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 676
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 677
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 678
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 679
Definition 5.13. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 680
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 681
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 682
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 683
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 684
given SuperHyperEdges; 685
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 686
SuperHyperEdges; 687
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 688
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 689
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 690
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 691
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 692
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 693
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 694
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 695
common SuperVertex. 696
Definition 5.14. Let an ordered pair S = (V, E) be a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

(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 neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from 697
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) 698
Vs if either of following conditions hold: 699
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 700
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 701
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 702
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 703
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 704
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 705
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 706
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 707
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 708
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 709
Definition 5.15. (Characterization of the neutrosophic neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 710
s). 711
Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E).

a neutrosophic 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 ,
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 713
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 714
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 715
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 716
SuperHyperPath . 717
Definition 5.16. ((neutrosophic) SuperHyperCycle). 718
Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 719
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for an extreme SuperHyperGraph 720
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum extreme cardinality of an extreme 721
SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality of the extreme SuperHyperEdges in 722
the consecutive extreme sequence of extreme SuperHyperEdges and extreme 723
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the extreme SuperHyperCycle and either 724
all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; 725
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic 726
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of 727
the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 728
neutrosophic cardinality consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 729
SuperHyperCycle and either all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices or all 731
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; 732
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for an 733
extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 734
contains the extreme coefficients defined as the extreme number of the maximum 735
extreme cardinality of the extreme SuperHyperEdges of an extreme 736
SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality consecutive extreme 737
SuperHyperEdges and extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 738
extreme SuperHyperCycle and either all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all 739
coefficient; 741
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for 742
a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic 743
SuperHyperEdges of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic 746
cardinality consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and neutrosophic 747
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and 748
either all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; 749
and the neutrosophic power is corresponded to its neutrosophic coefficient; 750
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for an extreme 751
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum extreme cardinality of an 752
extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality of the extreme 753
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive extreme sequence of extreme 754
extreme SuperHyperEdges; 757
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic 758
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of 759
the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 760
neutrosophic cardinality consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 761
SuperHyperCycle and either all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices or all 763
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges;; 764
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for 765
an extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the extreme 766
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the extreme coefficients defined as the extreme 767
number of the maximum extreme cardinality of the extreme SuperHyperVertices 768
of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality consecutive extreme 769
coefficient; 773
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for 774
a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic 775
SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic 778
cardinality consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and neutrosophic 779
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and 780
either all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; 781
and the neutrosophic power is corresponded to its neutrosophic coefficient. 782
Definition 5.17. ((neutrosophic/neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperCycle). 783
Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 784
(i) an δ−SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic kind of neutrosophic 785
SuperHyperCycle such that either of the following expressions hold for the 786
neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 787
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ.
The Expression (5.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the 788
Expression (5.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 789
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic kind of neutrosophic 790
SuperHyperCycle such that either of the following neutrosophic expressions hold 791
for the neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 792
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ.
The Expression (5.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. 793
And the Expression (5.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 794
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 795
For the sake of having a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, there’s a need to “redefine” 796
the notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 797
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 798
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 799
Definition 5.18. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 800
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 801
It’s useful to define a “neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 802
more ways to get neutrosophic type-results to make a neutrosophic more 803
understandable. 804
Definition 5.19. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 805
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) holds. Thus neutrosophic 806
SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperCycle, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 807
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic 808
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(5.20)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints

perEdges Belong to The neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, Mentioned in the Definition
(5.19)
SuperHyperPath , Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic 809
SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic 810
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table 811
(2) holds. 812
It’s useful to define a “neutrosophic” version of a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 813
Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 814
more neutrosophicly understandable. 815
For the sake of having a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, there’s a need to “redefine” 816
the neutrosophic notion of “neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. The SuperHyperVertices 817
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 818
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 819
Definition 5.20. Assume a SuperHyperCycle. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 820
SuperHyperCycle if the Table (3) holds. 821
6 Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle But As The 822
Extensions Except From Eulerian And 823
Hamiltonian Forms 824
The extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, extreme SuperHyperCycle, is up. Thus the 825
non-obvious extreme SuperHyperCycle, S is up. The extreme type-SuperHyperSet of 826
the extreme SuperHyperCycle, is: S is a extreme SuperHyperSet, is: S does includes 827

perEdges Belong to The neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(5.20)
only more than four extreme SuperHyperVertices in a connected neutrosophic 828
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the extreme 829
type-SuperHyperSet called the 830
“extreme SuperHyperCycle” 831
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple[non-simple] extreme type-SuperHyperSets 832
called the 833
SuperHyperCycle, 834
is only and only S in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with 835
a illustrated SuperHyperModeling. But all only obvious[non-obvious] simple[non-simple] 836
extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the obvious[non-obvious] simple[non-simple] extreme 837
SuperHyperCycle amid those type-SuperHyperSets, are S. A connected neutrosophic 838
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) as a linearly-over-packed SuperHyperModel is 839
featured on the Figures. 840
Example 6.1. Assume the SuperHyperGraphs in the Figures (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), 841
(12), (13), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), (21), (22), (23), (24), (25), and (26). 842
• On the Figure (7), the neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, neutrosophic 843
SuperHyperCycle, is up. E1 and E3 are some empty neutrosophic 844
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 845
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of neutrosophic 846
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 847
The neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is neutrosophic isolated means that 848
there’s no neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 849
the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given neutrosophic 850
C(N SHG) = {E2 } is a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle.

C(N SHG) = z is an neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial.
C(N SHG) = {V1 } is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle.
C(N SHG) = z is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial.
The following neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic 852
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of 853
the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 854
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 855

Is the neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 856
The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 857
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 858

Is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for an neutrosophic 859
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 860
the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 861
of neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s only one 862
neutrosophic consecutive sequence of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and 863
the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 864
but it has either all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges or all neutrosophic 865
SuperHyperVertices and in this case, it has all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. 866
There’s no neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle such that it has all neutrosophic 867
SuperHyperVertices. There are less than only four neutrosophic 868
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the 869
non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle isn’t up. The obvious simple 870
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is a 871
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only less than four neutrosophic 872
SuperHyperVertices. But the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 873

Doesn’t have less than four SuperHyperVertices inside the intended neutrosophic 875
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of 876
the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle isn’t up. To sum them up, the neutrosophic 877
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 878

Isn’t the non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 879
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. Since the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 880

Is a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for a neutrosophic 882
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 883
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices[SuperHyperEdges] such that there’s only one 884
neutrosophic consecutive neutrosophic sequence of neutrosophic 885
SuperHyperVertices and neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one 886
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, but it has either all neutrosophic 887
SuperHyperEdges or all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and in this case, it has 888
all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. There’s no neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 889
such that it has all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, given by that neutrosophic 890
type-SuperHyperSet; and it’s called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and it’s a 891
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. Since it has 892
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle but it has either all neutrosophic 897
all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. There are only less than four neutrosophic 899
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 900

Thus the obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 901

Is up. The obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 902
SuperHyperCycle, is: 903

Is the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, is: 904

Does includes only less than four SuperHyperVertices in a connected neutrosophic 905
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only 906
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 907
“neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle” 908
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple[non-simple] neutrosophic 909
type-SuperHyperSets called the 910
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 911
is only and only 912

• On the Figure (8), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyperCycle, is up. 913
E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty SuperHyperEdges but E2 isn’t a loop 914
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 915
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The 916
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is isolated means that there’s no SuperHyperEdge has it as 917
an endpoint. Thus the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every 918
given neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. Thus the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 919
V3 , is excluded in every given neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 920











E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a SuperHyperEdge. 983
Thus in the terms of SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one SuperHyperEdge, 984
namely, E4 . E2 is an isolated SuperHyperEdge. 985
With the exception of E2 , the concept could be applied. With keeping E2 in the 986
mind, the story is coming up. 987

C(N SHG) = {V1 , V2 , V3 } is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle.










• On the Figure (10), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, a SuperHyperCycle, is up. 1049
There’s no empty SuperHyperEdge but E3 are a loop SuperHyperEdge on {F }, 1050
and there are some SuperHyperEdges, namely, E1 on {H, V1 , V3 }, alongside E2 on 1051
{O, H, V4 , V3 } and E4 , E5 on {N, V1 , V2 , V3 , F }. 1052
C(N SHG) = {V3 , E1 , V4 , E2 , H, E1 , V3 } is a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle.

C(N SHG) = 4z 3 is a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial.
C(N SHG) = {V3 , V4 , H, V3 } is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle.
C(N SHG) = 4z 4 is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial.










There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following 1115
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is the simple 1116
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 1117
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle = {V5 , E1 , V4 , E4 , V5 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle = {V5 , V4 , V5 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 3 .










There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. 1180
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicSuperHyperCycle = {Vi , Ei , Vi+1 }21

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicSuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 11z 22 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−SuperHyperCycle =
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 11z 23 .

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
SuperHyperVertices. There are more than only four neutrosophic 1197
non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is up. The obvious simple 1199

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
Is the non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 1208
SuperHyperCycle. Since the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 1209

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. There aren’t only less than four neutrosophic 1228

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 1230

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
Is up. The non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1231
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, is: 1232

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .

i=1
∪{V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V1 }9j=21−j .
{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
Doesn’t include only less than four SuperHyperVertices in a connected 1234
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that 1235
the only neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1236

i=1 ∪ {V22 , E32 , Vi , Ei+11 , E11 , V

{Vi , Vi+1 }21
i=1
∪{V22 , Vi , V1 }9j=21−j .
• On the Figure (13), the SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyperCycle, is up. The 1242
following neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic 1243
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple neutrosophic 1244
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. The neutrosophic 1245
SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1246
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicSuperHyperCycle =

{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }

{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }


{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }
SuperHyperVertices. There are more than only four neutrosophic 1263

{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }


{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }

{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }

{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }

{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }


{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }


{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }


{V8 , E17 , V14 , E12 , V12 , E15 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E16 , V7 , E7 , V8 }
{V8 , V14 , V12 , V3 , V4 , V7 , V8 }
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic 1310
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. The following 1312
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicSuperHyperCycle = {}

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicSuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 0.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−SuperHyperCycle = {}
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 0.



Does has less than four SuperHyperVertices inside the intended neutrosophic 1340
the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is up. To sum them up, the neutrosophic 1342












In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) of dense 1378
SuperHyperModel as the Figure (14). 1379
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is the simple 1382
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. There’s 1383
no coverage on either all SuperHyperVertices or all SuperHyperEdges. Thus the 1384
quasi-discussion on the intended notion is up. Disclaimer: The terms are in this 1385
item are referred to the prefix “quasi” since the notion isn’t seen and applied 1386
totally but somehow the coincidence is achieved in the terms of neither of all 1387
SuperHyperVertices or all SuperHyperEdges in any coverage. Thus the terms 1388
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle 1389
SuperHyperPolynomial, Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperCycle, and 1390
Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial are up even 1391
neither of the analogous terms have the prefix ‘quasi” and even more all the 1392
context are about the quasi-style of the studied notion and the used notion is 1393
quasi-notion even they’re addressed without the term “quasi”. Furthermore, for 1394
the convenient usage and the harmony of the context with the used title and other 1395
applied segments , the term “quasi” isn’t used more than the following groups of 1396
expressions. 1397

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 11z 8 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycle = {V1 , Vi , V16 , V1 }6i=2 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 11z 8 .

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2
SuperHyperVertices. There aren’t less than only four neutrosophic 1418

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2

{Vi , Ei , V6 , E17 , V16 , d1 , V1 }5i=2
In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) of 1463
highly-embedding-connected SuperHyperModel as the Figure (15). 1464
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. There’s no coverage 1469
on either all SuperHyperVertices or all SuperHyperEdges. Thus the 1470
quasi-discussion on the intended notion is up. Disclaimer: The terms are in this 1471
item are referred to the prefix “quasi” since the notion isn’t seen and applied 1472
totally but somehow the coincidence is achieved in the terms of neither of all 1473
SuperHyperVertices or all SuperHyperEdges in any coverage. Thus the terms 1474
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle 1475
SuperHyperPolynomial, Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperCycle, and 1476
Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial are up even 1477
neither of the analogous terms have the prefix ‘quasi” and even more all the 1478
context are about the quasi-style of the studied notion and the used notion is 1479
quasi-notion even they’re addressed without the term “quasi”. Furthermore, for 1480
the convenient usage and the harmony of the context with the used title and other 1481
applied segments , the term “quasi” isn’t used more than the following groups of 1482
expressions. The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic 1483

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }
Is an Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for an neutrosophic 1492
the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 1497
There are not only four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1498
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic 1499
SuperHyperCycle isn’t up. The obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1500
called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 1501
includes only less than four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. But the 1502
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 1503

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle given by that neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1517
called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and it’s a neutrosophic 1518
SuperHyperCycle. Since it’s the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of 1519
a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic 1520
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s only one neutrosophic 1521
consecutive neutrosophic sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and 1522
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 1523
There are not only less than four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the 1524
intended neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1525

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }


{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }


{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }

simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1532
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called 1534
the 1535

{V14 , E4 , V12 , E6 , V13 , E7 , V14 }
{V14 V12 , V13 , V14 }
In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) of dense 1538
SuperHyperModel as the Figure (16). 1539
There’s neither empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The 1541

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }
SuperHyperCycle, is not: 1587

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }
Is the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, is not: 1588

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }
the 1594

{V1 , E6 , V5 , E5 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E7 , V2 , E1 , V1 }
{V1 , V5 , V6 , V4 , V2 , V1 }
In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1597
type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. There’s only one 1602
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges between any given neutrosophic amount of 1603
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Thus there isn’t any neutrosophic 1604
SuperHyperCycle at all. The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic 1605










the 1657


{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicSuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = z 6 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−SuperHyperCycle = {Vi }6i=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = z 6 .
is the simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 1667
SuperHyperCycle. The following neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic 1668

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.
the 1718

{V1 , E1 , V2 , E10 , V3 , E8 , V6 , E4 , V4 , E2 , V5 , E6 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle = {}.

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 0.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycle = {}.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 0

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 0.








the 1779

In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s noted that 1782
this neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is an neutrosophic graph 1783
G : (V, E) thus the notions in both settings are coincided. 1784

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 0









the 1842

In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s noted that 1845
this neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is an neutrosophic graph 1846
G : (V, E) thus the notions in both settings are coincided. In a connected 1847
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) as Linearly-Connected 1848
SuperHyperModel On the Figure (21). 1849
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle = {V8 , E3 , V9 , E4 , V8 }.

1856

1857

1858

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle = {V8 , V9 , V8 }.
1859

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle = {V15 V17 , V15 }.

1865

1866

1867

1868


1872

1873

1874

1875


1889

1890

1891

1892


1897

1898

1899

1900


1904

1905

1906

1907

There are only less than four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the 1920

1922

1923

1924

1925


1927

1928

1929

1930


1933

1934

1935

1936

the 1942

1945

1946

1947

1948


1956

1957

1958

1959


1965

1966

1967

1968


1972

1973

1974

1975


1989

1990

1991

1992


1997

1998

1999

2000


2004

2005

2006

2007

There are only less than four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the 2020

2022

2023

2024

2025


2027

2028

2029

2030


2033

2034

2035

2036

the 2042

2045

2046

2047

2048


2056

2057


C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = 322 .
2058


2064

2065

2066

2067


2071

2072

2073

2074


2088

2089

2090

2091


2096

2097

2098

2099


2103

2104

2105

2106

erHyperGirth C(ESHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is 2107
the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic 2108
SuperHyperVertices[SuperHyperEdges] such that there’s only one neutrosophic 2109
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 2111
given by that neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic 2112
SuperHyperCycle and it’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. Since it’s 2113
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. There are only less than four neutrosophic 2118

2120

2121

2122

2123


2125

2126

2127

2128


2131

2132

2133

2134

the 2140

2143

2144

2145

2146







SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) 2182
is the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic 2183
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 2186
given by that neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic 2187
SuperHyperCycle and it’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. Since it’s 2188
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. There are only less than four neutrosophic 2193



the 2203

Proposition 6.2. Assume a connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2208
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 2209
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperCycle = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperCycleSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a neutrosophic type-result-SuperHyperCycle. In other words, the least cardinality, the 2210
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a neutrosophic type-result-SuperHyperCycle is 2211
the cardinality of 2212

Figure 7. The SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Notions of SuperHyperCycle in

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)

the Example (6.1)
Proof. Assume a connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 2213
The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 } isn’t a 2214
neutrosophic quasi-type-result-SuperHyperCycle since neither neutrosophic amount of 2215
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges nor neutrosophic amount of neutrosophic 2216
SuperHyperVertices where neutrosophic amount refers to the neutrosophic number of 2217
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges) more than one to form any 2218
neutrosophic kind of neutrosophic consecutive consequence as the neutrosophic icon and 2219
neutrosophic generator of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in the terms of the 2220
neutrosophic longest form. Let us consider the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 2221

This neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices has the 2222
eligibilities to propose property such that there’s only one neutrosophic consecutive 2223
neutrosophic sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and neutrosophic 2224
SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle given by that 2225
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle but the 2226
maximum neutrosophic cardinality indicates that these neutrosophic 2227
type-SuperHyperSets couldn’t give us the neutrosophic lower bound in the term of 2228
neutrosophic sharpness. In other words, the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 2229

Of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices implies at least on-quasi-triangle style is up 2230
but sometimes the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 2231

Of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is free-quasi-triangle and it doesn’t make a

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the
generality of the connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. Thus if we
assume in the worst case, literally,
V \ V \ {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }
Is a neutrosophic quasi-type-result-SuperHyperCycle. In other words, the least

cardinality, the lower sharp bound for the neutrosophic cardinality, of a neutrosophic
neutrosophic quasi-type-result-SuperHyperCycle is the cardinality of
V \ V \ {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
Then we’ve lost some connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of the

connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and
their quasi-types but the neutrosophic quasi-type-result-SuperHyperCycle is only up in

this neutrosophic quasi-type-result-SuperHyperCycle. It’s the contradiction to that fact
on the neutrosophic generality. There are some counterexamples to deny this statement.
One of them comes from the setting of the graph titled path and star as the
counterexamples-classes or reversely direction cycle as the examples-classes, are
well-known classes in that setting and they could be considered as the examples-classes
and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
V \ V \ {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
Let V \ V \ {z, z 0 } in mind. There’s no neutrosophic necessity on the neutrosophic 2232
SuperHyperEdge since we need at least three neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices to form 2233
a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the neutrosophic principles of the 2234
main neutrosophic definition since there’s no neutrosophic condition to be satisfied but 2235
the neutrosophic condition is on the neutrosophic existence of the neutrosophic 2236
SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. In other 2237
words, if there are three neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges, then the neutrosophic 2238
SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended neutrosophic definition to 2239
be neutrosophicly applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z, z 0 } is withdrawn not by the 2240
neutrosophic conditions of the main neutrosophic definition but by the neutrosophic 2241
necessity of the neutrosophic pre-condition on the neutrosophic usage of the main 2242
neutrosophic definition. 2243
To make sense with the precise neutrosophic words in the terms of “R-’, the 2244
follow-up neutrosophic illustrations are neutrosophicly coming up. 2245
The following neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle.
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle.

The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for a neutrosophic

SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with
the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s only one neutrosophic consecutive
neutrosophic sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle given by that
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, instead of
all given by Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is related to the neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
There are not only four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is
up. The obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic
SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only four neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices. But the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic

SuperHyperVertices,
Doesn’t have less than four SuperHyperVertices inside the intended neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far four neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges. Thus the non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of
the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle isn’t up. To sum them up, the neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Isn’t the non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 2246
R-SuperHyperCycle. Since the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 2247

SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is 2249
the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic 2250
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle given by 2253
that neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and 2254
it’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. Since it’s 2255
the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 2256
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s only one 2257
neutrosophic consecutive neutrosophic sequence of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 2258
and neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges form only one neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 2259
There are not only less than four neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 2260
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 2261



SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only simple 2266
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 2269

In a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only a neutrosophic free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and a neutrosophic on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also
it’s a neutrosophic girth embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle amid those
obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle,
are
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2273
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 2274

Is a neutrosophic type-result-SuperHyperCycle. In other words, the least cardinality, 2275
the lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a neutrosophic 2276
type-result-SuperHyperCycle is the cardinality of 2277

2278
Proposition 6.3. Assume a simple neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the neutrosophic number of type-result-R-SuperHyperCycle has, the least
neutrosophic cardinality, the lower sharp neutrosophic bound for neutrosophic
cardinality, is the neutrosophic cardinality of
If there’s a neutrosophic type-result-R-SuperHyperCycle with the least neutrosophic 2279
cardinality, the lower sharp neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 2280
Proof. The neutrosophic structure of the neutrosophic type-result-R-SuperHyperCycle

decorates the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any neutrosophic
connections so as this neutrosophic style implies different versions of neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum neutrosophic cardinality in the terms of
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The lower neutrosophic bound is to
have the maximum neutrosophic groups of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have
perfect neutrosophic connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges and the outside of
this neutrosophic SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the connectedness of the
used neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph arising from its neutrosophic properties taken from
the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in
the targeted neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, then there’s no neutrosophic connection.
Furthermore, the neutrosophic existence of one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no
neutrosophic effect to talk about the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. Since at least
two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices involve to make a title in the neutrosophic
background of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge but at least two
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices make the neutrosophic version of neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the neutrosophic setting of non-obvious neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s necessary
to mention that the word “Simple” is used as neutrosophic adjective for the initial
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no neutrosophic appearance of the loop
neutrosophic version of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and this neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The neutrosophic adjective “loop” on the basic
neutrosophic framework engages one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex but it never
happens in this neutrosophic setting. With these neutrosophic bases, on a neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph, there’s at least one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at
least a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle has the neutrosophic cardinality of a
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle has the
neutrosophic cardinality at least a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Assume a
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This neutrosophic SuperHyperSet isn’t a
neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle since either the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is an
obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperModel thus it never happens since there’s no
neutrosophic usage of this neutrosophic framework and even more there’s no
neutrosophic connection inside or the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious and
as its consequences, there’s a neutrosophic contradiction with the term “neutrosophic
R-SuperHyperCycle” since the maximum neutrosophic cardinality never happens for
this neutrosophic style of the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no
neutrosophic connection inside as mentioned in first neutrosophic case in the forms of
drawback for this selected neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Let
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }}
Comes up. This neutrosophic case implies having the neutrosophic style of
on-quasi-triangle neutrosophic style on the every neutrosophic elements of this
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Precisely, the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is the
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that some
neutrosophic amount of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle
neutrosophic style. The neutrosophic cardinality of the v SuperHypeSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }}
Is the maximum in comparison to the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
V \ V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But the lower neutrosophic bound is up. Thus the minimum neutrosophic cardinality of
the maximum neutrosophic cardinality ends up the neutrosophic discussion. The first
neutrosophic term refers to the neutrosophic setting of the neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph but this key point is enough since there’s a neutrosophic
SuperHyperClass of a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has no on-quasi-triangle
neutrosophic style amid some amount of its neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. This
neutrosophic setting of the neutrosophic SuperHyperModel proposes a neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet has only some amount neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from one
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge such that there’s no neutrosophic amount of
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges more than one involving these some amount of these
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The neutrosophic cardinality of this neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet is the maximum and the neutrosophic case is occurred in the minimum
neutrosophic situation. To sum them up, the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
Has the maximum neutrosophic cardinality such that
Contains some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

distinct-covers-order-amount neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges for amount of neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices taken from the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
It means that the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
Is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle for the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 2281
neutrosophic background in the neutrosophic terms of worst neutrosophic case and the 2282
common theme of the lower neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific neutrosophic 2283
SuperHyperClasses of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are neutrosophic 2284
free-quasi-triangle. 2285
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 2286
are coming up. 2287


Is an Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for an neutrosophic

neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge

amid some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is related to the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex inside the intended neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is up. The
obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic
SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only one neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex. But the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
doesn’t have less than two SuperHyperVertices inside the intended neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far an SuperHyperEdge. Thus the
non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic
R-SuperHyperCycle is up. To sum them up, the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic

R-SuperHyperCycle. Since the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle C(ESHG) for an neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that neutrosophic
type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and it’s an neutrosophic
SuperHyperCycle. Since it’s the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of a
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no
a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some amount neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
instead of all given by that neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the neutrosophic
SuperHyperCycle. There isn’t only less than two neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
inside the intended neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle,
is up. The non-obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic

SuperHyperCycle, not:
Is the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected neutrosophic 2288
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 2289
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 2290
“neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle” 2292
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle, 2294
is only and only

it’s a neutrosophic stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
are
To sum them up, assume a simple neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).
Then the neutrosophic number of R-SuperHyperCycle has, the least cardinality, the
lower sharp bound for cardinality, is the neutrosophic cardinality of
If there’s a R-SuperHyperCycle with the least cardinality, the lower sharp bound for 2296
cardinality. 2297
Proposition 6.4. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

If a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices, then the neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic
R-SuperHyperCycle is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 2298
R-SuperHyperCycle is at least the maximum neutrosophic number of neutrosophic 2299
SuperHyperVertices of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of 2300
the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 2301
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum neutrosophic number of 2302
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in some 2303
cases but the maximum number of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 2304
neutrosophic number of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the neutrosophic 2305
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. 2306
Proof. Assume a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z neutrosophic

number of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Then every neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex has at least no neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with others in common.
Thus those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have the eligibles to be contained in a
neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. Those neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are
potentially included in a neutrosophic style-R-SuperHyperCycle. Formally, consider
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
Are the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z.
where the ∼ isn’t an equivalence relation but only the symmetric relation on the
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The formal
definition is as follows.
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z
if and only if Zi and Zj are the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and there’s only and
only one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) between the neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices Zi and Zj . The other definition for the neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) in the terms of neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle but
with slightly differences in the maximum neutrosophic cardinality amid those
neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Thus the
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Neutrosophic cardinality ,

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle.

E
Let Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong
to the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 2307
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
2308
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all neutrosophic
intended SuperHyperVertices but in a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle,
Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a
connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If a neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the
neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
SuperHyperVertices of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 2311
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 2312
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in 2314
some cases but the maximum number of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 2315
maximum neutrosophic number of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 2316
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. 2317
are coming up. 2319



SuperHyperVertices,


SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}

is only and only


are
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower

sharp bound for the cardinality, of a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle is the cardinality
of
To sum them up, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If

a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices, then the neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic
R-SuperHyperCycle is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
SuperHyperVertices of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 2330
of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 2331
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle in 2333
some cases but the maximum number of the neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 2334
maximum neutrosophic number of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 2335
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a neutrosophic 2336
R-SuperHyperCycle. 2337
Proposition 6.5. Assume a connected non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2338
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 2339
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 2340
inside of any given neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle minus all neutrosophic 2341
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 2342
unique neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 2343
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle, minus 2344
all neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 2345
Proof. The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 2346
non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 2347
addresses some issues about the neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 2348
delivers some remarks on the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 2349
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 2350
for distinct amount of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all taken from that 2351
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but this 2352
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either has the 2353
maximum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 2354
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 2355
least one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all neutrosophic 2356
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle where the 2357
neutrosophic completion of the neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, 2358
a neutrosophic embedded R-SuperHyperCycle. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 2359
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 2360
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 2361
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 2362
neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 2363
The less than two distinct types of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 2364
minimum neutrosophic style of the embedded neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. The 2365
interior types of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the 2366
neutrosophic number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior 2367
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 2368
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any 2369
distinct types of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the neutrosophic 2370
R-SuperHyperCycle. Thus neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only 2371
in one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the 2372
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In the 2373
embedded neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, there’s the usage of exterior neutrosophic 2374
SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the 2375
title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One neutrosophic 2376
SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 2377
the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement has been ignored in 2378
the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the neutrosophic 2379
R-SuperHyperCycle. The neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle with the exclusion of the 2380
exclusion of all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 2381
and with other terms, the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle with the inclusion of all 2382
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a 2383
neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 2384
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one neutrosophic 2385
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct 2386
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given neutrosophic 2387
quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle minus all neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them 2388
but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique neutrosophic 2389
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct neutrosophic 2390
SuperHyperVertices in an neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle, minus all 2391
neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 2392
are coming up. 2394



SuperHyperVertices,

SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}


is only and only

are


of
To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2403
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 2404
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 2405
inside of any given neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle minus all neutrosophic 2406
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only 2407
an unique neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 2408
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle, minus 2409
all neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 2410
Proposition 6.6. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 2411
The all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any neutrosophic 2412
quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle if for any of them, and any of other corresponded neutrosophic 2413
SuperHyperVertex, some interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 2414
neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no neutrosophic exception at all minus all 2415
neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 2416
Proof. The main definition of the neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle has two titles. a 2417
neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle and its corresponded quasi-maximum 2418
neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 2419
any neutrosophic number, there’s a neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle with that 2420
quasi-maximum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 2421
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded neutrosophic 2422
SuperHyperGraph, then the neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 2423
collection of all the neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycles for all neutrosophic 2424
numbers less than its neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 2425
neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the 2426
neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle, again and more in the operations of collecting 2427
all the neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycles acted on the all possible used 2428
formations of the neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one neutrosophic number. 2429
This neutrosophic number is 2430
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-SuperHyperCycles. 2431
Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic SuperHyperCycle be a 2432
neutrosophic number, a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a neutrosophic 2433
SuperHyperCycle. Then 2434
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle is 2435
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 2436
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

∪zNeutrosophic Number {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 2437
technical definition for the neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle. 2438
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperCycle =
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
= zNeutrosophic Number |
= max zNeutrosophic Number }.
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the neutrosophic 2439
SuperHyperCycle poses the upcoming expressions. 2440
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 2441
= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 2442

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 2443


2444
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

2445

2446

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 2447
“neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 2448
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its neutrosophic 2449
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 2450
another name for “neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle” but, precisely, it’s the 2451
generalization of “neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle” since “neutrosophic 2452
Quasi-SuperHyperCycle” happens “neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle” in a neutrosophic 2453
SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but “neutrosophic 2454
SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle” in a 2455
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background since 2456
there are some ambiguities about the neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. 2457
To get orderly keywords, the terms, “neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 2458
“neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperCycle”, and “neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle” are up. 2459
Thus, let zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 2460
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperCycle be a neutrosophic number, a neutrosophic 2461
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle and the new terms are 2462
up. 2463

∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
2464
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
2465
2466
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality = max zNeutrosoph
And with go back to initial structure, 2467


2468

2469

2470

Thus, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 2471
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle 2472
if for any of them, and any of other corresponded neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some 2473
interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually neutrosophic 2474
SuperHyperNeighbors with no neutrosophic exception at all minus all neutrosophic 2475
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 2476
are coming up. 2478




SuperHyperVertices,

SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}

is only and only

are


of
To sum them up, in a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 2487
The all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any neutrosophic 2488
quasi-R-SuperHyperCycle if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 2489
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 2490
mutually neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no neutrosophic exception at all 2491
minus all neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 2492
Any neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle only contains all interior neutrosophic 2494
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 2495
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible neutrosophic 2496
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with 2497
no exception minus all neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of 2498
them but everything is possible about neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 2499
neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 2500
Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 2501
neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some neutrosophic 2502
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all neutrosophic numbers of those neutrosophic 2503
SuperHyperVertices from that neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 2504
than r distinct neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given neutrosophic 2505
SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 2506
neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 2507
neutrosophic bound for neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected neutrosophic 2508
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 2509
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 2510
the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 2511
to have some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a neutrosophic 2512
R-SuperHyperCycle. Since it doesn’t have the maximum neutrosophic cardinality 2513
of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2514
there’s a neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 2515
The neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} 2516
is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 2517
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but it isn’t a neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle. Since 2518
it doesn’t do the neutrosophic procedure such that such that there’s a neutrosophic 2519
SuperHyperEdge to have some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at 2520
least one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the 2521
connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a neutrosophic 2522
SuperHyperVertex, titled its neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that neutrosophic 2523
SuperHyperVertex in the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the 2524
neutrosophic procedure”.]. There’s only one neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside 2525
the intended neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of neutrosophic 2526
SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the obvious neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle, VESHE 2527
is up. The obvious simple neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the neutrosophic 2528
R-SuperHyperCycle, VESHE , is a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only 2529
all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of neutrosophic pairs are 2530
titled Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected neutrosophic 2531
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Since the neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 2532
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 2533
maximum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a neutrosophic 2534
SuperHyperSet S of neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a neutrosophic 2535
SuperHyperEdge to have some neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. Thus, in a 2536
connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any neutrosophic 2537
R-SuperHyperCycle only contains all interior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all 2538
exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique neutrosophic 2539
SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible neutrosophic 2540
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with 2541
no exception minus all neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of 2542
them but everything is possible about neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 2543
neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 2544
are coming up. 2546




SuperHyperVertices,

SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}


is only and only

are


of
To sum them up, assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2555
ESHG : (V, E). Any neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle only contains all interior 2556
neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and all exterior neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 2557
from the unique neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all 2558
possible neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all neutrosophic 2559
SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with no exception minus all neutrosophic 2560
SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of them but everything is possible about 2561
neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors 2562
out. 2563
Remark 6.8. The words “ neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle” and “neutrosophic 2564
SuperHyperDominating” both refer to the maximum neutrosophic type-style. In other 2565
words, they refer to the maximum neutrosophic SuperHyperNumber and the 2566
neutrosophic SuperHyperSet with the maximum neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. 2567
Consider a neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating. Then a neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 2569
has the members poses only one neutrosophic representative in a neutrosophic 2570
quasi-SuperHyperDominating. 2571
Proof. Assume a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Consider a 2572
neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating. By applying the Proposition (6.7), the 2573
neutrosophic results are up. Thus on a connected neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 2574
ESHG : (V, E). Consider a neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating. Then a neutrosophic 2575
SuperHyperCycle has the members poses only one neutrosophic representative in a 2576
neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperDominating. 2577
7 Background 2578
There are some researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, there are 2579
some discussion and literature reviews about them. 2580
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 2581
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step toward the 2582
research on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article is published on the 2583
journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and the pages 531-561. In this 2584
research article, different types of notions like dominating, resolving, coloring, 2585
Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, 2586
zero forcing number, zero forcing neutrosophic- number, independent number, 2587
independent neutrosophic-number, clique number, clique neutrosophic-number, 2588
matching number, matching neutrosophic-number, girth, neutrosophic girth, 2589
1-zero-forcing number, 1-zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, failed 1-zero-forcing 2590
number, failed 1-zero-forcing neutrosophic-number, global- offensive alliance, t-offensive 2591
alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, and global-powerful alliance are defined 2592
in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of 2593
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are cases of research. Some 2594
results are applied in family of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 2595
Thus this research article has concentrated on the vast notions and introducing the 2596
majority of notions. 2597
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 2598
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 2599
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 2600
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 2601
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 2602
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 2603
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 2604
abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 06-14. 2605
The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of 2606
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results 2607
based on initial background. 2608
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 2609
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 2610
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 2611
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 2612
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 2613
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 2614
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 2615
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with abbreviation “J Math 2616
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 2617
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 2618
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 2619
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 2620
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 2621
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 2622
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 2623
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 2624
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 2625
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 2626
in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 2627
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 2628
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [7] by 2629
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 2630
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2631
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 2632
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 2633
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 2634
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [9] by Henry 2635
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 2636
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 2637
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2638
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 2639
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 2640
Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 2641
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 2642
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 2643
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 2644
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs 2645
To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 2646
Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2647
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 2648
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 2649
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 2650
Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in 2651
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 2652
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 2653
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 2654
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in 2655
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [17] by Henry 2656
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 2657
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 2658
in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 2659
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 2660
Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 2661
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 2662
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 2663
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [20] by 2664
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2665
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [21] by 2666
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 2667
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 2668
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 2669
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 2670
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett 2671
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 2672
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [24] by Henry 2673
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 2674
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching 2675
Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [25] by Henry 2676
Garrett (2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 2677
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 2678
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [26] by Henry 2679
Garrett (2023), “Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of 2680
Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s 2681
Recognition called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [27] by Henry Garrett 2682
(2023), “Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 2683
Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 2684
Ref. [28] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every 2685
Embedded Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 2686
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in 2687
Ref. [29] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2688
Regions titled neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 2689
Recognition modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [30] by 2690
Henry Garrett (2023), “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 2691
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 2692
Ref. [31] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 2693
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 2694
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [32] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) 2695
SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled 2696
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [33] by Henry Garrett (2023), 2697
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 2698
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 2699
in Ref. [34] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in 2700
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [35] by Henry 2701
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2702
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 2703
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [36] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions 2704
Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 2705
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [37] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of 2706
Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on 2707
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in 2708
Ref. [38] by Henry Garrett (2022), there are some endeavors to formalize the basic 2709
SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 2710
Some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as book in 2711
Ref. [39] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar and has more 2712
than 2732 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs” and published 2713
by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, 2714
Ohio 43212 United State. This research book covers different types of notions and 2715
settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. 2716
Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as book 2717
in Ref. [40] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar and has more 2718
than 3504 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” and published by 2719
Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, 2720
Florida 33131 United States. This research book presents different types of notions 2721
SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 2722
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 2723
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 2724
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 2725
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 2726
See the seminal researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the framework 2727
of Extreme SuperHyperCycle theory, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle theory, and 2728
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–38]. Two popular research books in 2729
Scribd in the terms of high readers, 2638 and 3363 respectively, on neutrosophic science 2730
is on [39, 40]. 2731
References 2732
1. Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2733
SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 2734
10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 2735
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf). 2736
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss journal/vol49/iss1/34). 2737
2. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 2738
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 2739
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 2740
3. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 2741
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 2742
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 2743
(2022) 242-263. 2744
4. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 2745
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 2746
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 2747
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 2748
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 2749
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 2750
5. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 2751
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 2752
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 2753
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 2754
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 2755
6. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 2756
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 2757
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 2758
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 2759
7. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 2760
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 2761
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2762
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 2763
8. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 2764
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2765
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 2766
9. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 2767
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 2768
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 2769
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 2770
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 2771
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 2772
10. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 2773
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 2774
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2775
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 2776
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 2777
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 2778
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 2779
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 2780
12. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 2781
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 2782
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 2783
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 2784
13. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 2785
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2786
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 2787
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 2788
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 2789
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 2790
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 2791
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 2792
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 2793
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 2794
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 2795
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2796
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 2797
17. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2798
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 2799
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010105 (doi: 2800
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 2801
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 2803
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 2804
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 2805
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 2806
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 2807
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 2808
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 2809
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 2810
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 2811
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2812
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 2813
21. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2814
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 2815
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 2816
22. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 2817
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 2818
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 2819
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 2820
23. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 2821
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 2822
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 2823
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 2824
24. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 2825
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 2826
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 2827
25. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 2828
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 2829
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 2830
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18494.15680). 2831
26. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 2832
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 2833
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2834
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 2835
27. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 2836
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 2837
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 2838
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 2839
28. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 2840
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 2841
29. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 2843
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 2844
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 2845
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23172.19849). 2846
30. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 2847
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 2848
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 2849
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 2850
31. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 2851
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 2852
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 2855
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 2856
33. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 2857
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2858
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 2859
34. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 2860
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 2861
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 2862
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 2863
35. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 2864
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 2865
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 2866
36. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2867
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 2868
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 2869
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 2870
37. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 2871
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2872
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 2873
38. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 2874
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 2875
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 2876
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 2877
39. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing: 2878
Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 2879
United States. ISBN: 979-1-59973-725-6 2880
(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf). 2881
40. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL 2882
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 2883
33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 2884
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf). 2885
View publication stats

A Research On Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II

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

A Research On Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

A Research On Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · February 2023

285 PUBLICATIONS 2,862 CITATIONS

Featured Articles View project

Number Graphs And Numbers View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and 3

Hamiltonian Sets As Hyper Covering Versus Super 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 7

DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 8

In this research, assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then an Extreme SuperHyperCycle 10

cardinality of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality of the extreme 12

SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive extreme sequence of extreme SuperHyperEdges 13

and either all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; a 15

Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 16

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 17

SuperHyperEdges of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic cardinality 18

consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 19

SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; an Extreme 21

SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for an extreme SuperHyperGraph 22

N SHG : (V, E) is the extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the extreme coefficients 23

SuperHyperEdges of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality 25

consecutive extreme SuperHyperEdges and extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 26

extreme SuperHyperEdges; and the extreme power is corresponded to its extreme 28

coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for a 29

neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic 30

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 31

neutrosophic number of the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 32

SuperHyperEdges of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic cardinality 33

consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 34

SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; and the neutrosophic power 36

is corresponded to its neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme R-SuperHyperCycle 37

cardinality of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme cardinality of the extreme 39

SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive extreme sequence of extreme SuperHyperEdges 40

and either all extreme SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; a 42

Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCycle C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 43

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum neutrosophic cardinality of the neutrosophic 44

SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high neutrosophic cardinality 45

consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 46

SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges; an Extreme 48

R-SuperHyperCycle SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for an extreme 49

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 50

of the extreme SuperHyperVertices of an extreme SuperHyperSet S of high extreme 52

cardinality consecutive extreme SuperHyperEdges and extreme SuperHyperVertices 53

SuperHyperVertices or all extreme SuperHyperEdges; and the extreme power is 55

corresponded to its extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 56

SuperHyperPolynomial C(N SHG) for a neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 57

N SHG : (V, E) is the neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the neutrosophic 58

coefficients defined as the neutrosophic number of the maximum neutrosophic 59

cardinality of the neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 60

of high neutrosophic cardinality consecutive neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 61

neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the neutrosophic 62

SuperHyperCycle and either all neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices or all neutrosophic 63

SuperHyperEdges; and the neutrosophic power is corresponded to its neutrosophic 64

coefficient. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then an δ−SuperHyperCycle is a 65

neutrosophic kind of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle such that either of the following 66

expressions hold for the neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 67

|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 68

Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 69

if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperCycle is a neutrosophic 70

kind of neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle such that either of the following neutrosophic 71