New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition As (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super Mixed-Illustrations

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/368473015
New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition As (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By

SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super Mixed-Illustrations
Preprint · February 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
297 PUBLICATIONS 3,155 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Fuzzy Logic View project
Number Graphs And Numbers View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 14 February 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA
New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 2
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper 3
Imaginations On Super Mixed-Illustrations 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperDuality). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 10
ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } 11
and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic 12
e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 13
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such that 14
Va ∈ Ei , Ej and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 15
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such that 16
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 17
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 18
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 19
SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 20
re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic 21
rv-SuperHyperDuality. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). Assume a Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 23
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 24
SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 27
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 28
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive 29
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 30
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if 31
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 32
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 33
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 34
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 35
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 37
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; an Extreme SuperHyperDuality 38
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 39
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 41
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 42
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 43
Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 44
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 45
form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 46
Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 47
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 48
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 50
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 51
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 52
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 53
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 54
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is 55
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s 56
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 57
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 59
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 60
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 61
and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 62
a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, 63
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and 64
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 65
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 66
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 67
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 68
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; an 69
Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 70
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 71
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an 72
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 73
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 74
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet 75
S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 76
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the 77
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 78
SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 79
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a 81
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 82
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 83
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 84
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 85
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 86
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; and the 87
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific 88
research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 89
SuperHyperDuality and Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. Two different types of 90
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 91
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 92
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 93
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 94
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 95
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 96
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 97
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 98
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 99
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 100
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 101
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 102
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 103
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 104
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 105
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 106
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 107
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 108
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 109
δ−SuperHyperDuality is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 110
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 111
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 112
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 113
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 114
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDuality is a maximal 115
Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such 116
that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 117
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 118
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 119
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 120
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 121
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 122
version of a SuperHyperDuality . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 123
SuperHyperDuality more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 124
SuperHyperDuality, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperDuality ”. 125
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 126
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 127
assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperDuality . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 128
SuperHyperDuality if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, 129
SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic 130
SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 131
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of 132
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The 133
Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 134
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 135
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 136
based on a SuperHyperDuality . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the 137
foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to 138
have all SuperHyperDuality until the SuperHyperDuality, then it’s officially called a 139
“SuperHyperDuality” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperDuality . There are some 140
instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperDuality ”. 141
These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 142
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperDuality . For the 143
sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality, there’s a need to “redefine” the 144
notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality” and a “Neutrosophic 145
SuperHyperDuality ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned 146
by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of 147
the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 148
It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a 149
SuperHyperDuality are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality” if the 150
intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. 151
Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic 152
SuperHyperDuality more understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 153
There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 154
SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperDuality, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 155
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 156
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality”, “Neutrosophic 157
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 158
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 159
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality” where it’s the 160
strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperDuality amid the 161
maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperDuality .] 162
SuperHyperDuality . A graph is a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and 163
the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic 164
SuperHyperGraph. There are some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath 165
if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two 166
exceptions; it’s SuperHyperDuality if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 167
given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 168
amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 169
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 170
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s 171
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these 172
SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 173
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 174
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 175
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 176
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 177
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 178
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 179
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 180
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 181
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 182
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 183
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 184
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 185
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 186
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 187
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 188
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 189
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 190
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 191
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 192
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 193
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 194
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperDuality, 195
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 196
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperDuality or the strongest 197
SuperHyperDuality in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 198
SuperHyperDuality, called SuperHyperDuality, and the strongest SuperHyperDuality, 199
called Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality, some general results are introduced. Beyond 200
that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges 201
but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form 202
any style of a SuperHyperDuality. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperDuality 203
but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperDuality. It, literarily, deforms and 204
it doesn’t form. A basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality theory, 205
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 206
Keywords: Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, (Neutrosophic) 207
SuperHyperDuality, Cancer’s Extreme Recognition 208
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 209
1 Background 210
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 211
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them date back on January 22, 212
2023. 213
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 214
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step toward the 215
research on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article is published on the 216
journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and the pages 531-561. In this 217
research article, different types of notions like dominating, resolving, coloring, 218
Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, 219
zero forcing number, zero forcing neutrosophic- number, independent number, 220
independent neutrosophic-number, clique number, clique neutrosophic-number, 221
matching number, matching neutrosophic-number, girth, neutrosophic girth, 222
1-zero-forcing number, 1-zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, failed 1-zero-forcing 223
number, failed 1-zero-forcing neutrosophic-number, global- offensive alliance, t-offensive 224
alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, and global-powerful alliance are defined 225
in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of 226
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are cases of research. Some 227
results are applied in family of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 228
Thus this research article has concentrated on the vast notions and introducing the 229
majority of notions. 230
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 231
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 232
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 233
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 234
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 235
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 236
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 237
abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 06-14. 238
The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of 239
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results 240
based on initial background. 241
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 242
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 243
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 244
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 245
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 246
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 247
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 248
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with abbreviation “J Math 249
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 250
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 251
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 252
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 253
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 254
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 255
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 256
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 257
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 258
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 259
in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 260
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 261
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [7] by 262
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 263
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), 264
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 265
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 266
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 267
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [9] by Henry 268
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 269
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 270
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), 271
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 272
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 273
Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 274
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 275
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 276
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 277
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs 278
To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 279
Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 280
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 281
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 282
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 283
Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in 284
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 285
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 286
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 287
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in 288
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [17] by Henry 289
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 290
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 291
in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 292
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 293
Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 294
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 295
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 296
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [20] by 297
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 298
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [21] by 299
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 300
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 301
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 302
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 303
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett 304
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 305
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [24] by Henry 306
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 307
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching 308
Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [25] by Henry 309
Garrett (2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 310
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 311
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [26] by Henry 312
Garrett (2023), “Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of 313
Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s 314
Recognition called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [27] by Henry Garrett 315
(2023), “Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 316
Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 317
Ref. [28] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every 318
Embedded Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 319
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in 320
Ref. [29] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 321
Regions titled neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 322
Recognition modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [30] by 323
Henry Garrett (2023), “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 324
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 325
Ref. [31] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 326
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 327
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [32] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) 328
SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled 329
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [33] by Henry Garrett (2023), 330
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 331
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 332
in Ref. [34] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in 333
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [35] by Henry 334
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 335
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 336
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [36] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions 337
Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 338
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [37] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of 339
Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on 340
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in 341
Ref. [38] by Henry Garrett (2022), there are some endeavors to formalize the basic 342
SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 343
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 344
proposed as book in Ref. [39] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 345
Scholar and has more than 3230 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 346
Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st 347
Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research book covers different 348
types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 349
SuperHyperGraph theory. 350
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 351
proposed as book in Ref. [40] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 352
Scholar and has more than 4117 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 353
and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell 354
Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This research book presents different 355
types of notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of 356
duality in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This 357
research book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 358
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 359
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 360
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 361
framework of Extreme SuperHyperDuality theory, Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality 362
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–38]. Two popular scientific 363
research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 3230 and 4117 respectively, on 364
neutrosophic science is on [39, 40]. 365
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 366
Motivation Of This Research 367
In this research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of motivations. I try 368
to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been faced with some 369
attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In this case, there 370
are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the cells could be 371
labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive labels which all 372
are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the embedded 373
situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered as “new 374
groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting more 375
proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 376
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 377
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 378
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 379
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 380
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 381
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 382
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 383
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 384
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 385
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 386
called “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 387
to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 388
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 389
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 390
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 391
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 392
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 393
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 394
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 395
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 396
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 397
formally called “ SuperHyperDuality” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 398
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 399
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 400
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 401
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 402
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 403
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 404
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 405
Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 406
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 407
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 408
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an 409
Extreme SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperDuality, SuperHyperStar, 410
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 411
either the optimal SuperHyperDuality or the Extreme SuperHyperDuality in those 412
Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 413
SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme SuperHyperPath s have only two 414
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 415
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperDuality. There isn’t any formation 416
of any SuperHyperDuality but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperDuality. 417
It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 418
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 419
find the “ amount of SuperHyperDuality” of either individual of cells or the groups of 420
cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 421
SuperHyperDuality” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of 422
cells? 423
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 424
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 425
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 426
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 427
SuperHyperDuality” and “Extreme SuperHyperDuality” on “SuperHyperGraph” and 428
“Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more motivations to define 429
SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this SuperHyperNotion with 430
other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some instances and examples to make 431
clarifications about the framework of this research. The general results and some results 432
about some connections are some avenues to make key point of this research, “Cancer’s 433
Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 434
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 435
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 436
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are 437
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 438
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 439
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 440
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperDuality and 441
Extreme SuperHyperDuality, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperDuality” and 442
“Extreme SuperHyperDuality”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in order to 443
make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and 444
Extreme SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 445
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 446
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to 447
origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to extend 448
the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph, 449
in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme 450
SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general SuperHyperRelations and 451
as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are contained in the section 452
“General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are 453
well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, 454
“General Results”, “ SuperHyperDuality”, “Extreme SuperHyperDuality”, “Results on 455
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious 456
questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about 457
excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description 458
and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperDuality”. The 459
keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” 460
with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite 461
as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 462
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 463
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 464
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 465
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 466
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 467
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 468
3 Preliminaries Of This Research On the Redeemed 469
Ways 470
In this section, the basic material in this research, is referred to [Single Valued 471
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [38],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [38],Definition 472
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [38],Definition 2.5,p.2), 473
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [38],Definition 474
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [38], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 475
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [38],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 476
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [38],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 477
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 478
(Ref. [38],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 479
to Ref. [38]. 480
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this research, is presented. 481
Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 482
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [38],Definition 2.1,p.1). 483
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 484
+
]− 0, 1 [. 485
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [38],Definition 2.2,p.2). 486
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 3.3. 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 3.4. 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 3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [38],Definition 487
2.5,p.2). 488
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 489
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 490
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 491
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 492
1, 2, . . . , n); 493
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 494
V; 495
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 496
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 497
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 498
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 499
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 500
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 501
(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 . 502
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 503
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 504
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 505
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 506
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 507
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 508
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 509
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 510
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 511
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 512
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 513
(Ref. [38],Definition 2.7,p.3). 514
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 515
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 516
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 517
could be characterized as follow-up items. 518
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 519
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 520
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 521
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 522
HyperEdge; 523
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 524
SuperEdge; 525
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 526
SuperHyperEdge. 527
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 528
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 529
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [38], Definition 2.7, p.3). 530
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 531
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 532
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 533
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 534
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 535
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 536
Definition 3.8. 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 3.9. 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 3.10. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 537
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 538
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 539
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 540
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 541
1, 2, . . . , n); 542
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 543
V; 544
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 545
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 546
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 547
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 548
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 549
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 550
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 551
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 552
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 553
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 554
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 555
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 556
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 557
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 558
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 559
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 560
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 561
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 564
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 565
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 567
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 568
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 569
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 570
HyperEdge; 571
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 572
SuperEdge; 573
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 574
SuperHyperEdge. 575
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 576
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 577
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 578
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 579
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 580
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 581
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 582
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 583
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 584
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 585
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 586
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 587
given SuperHyperEdges; 588
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 589
SuperHyperEdges; 590
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 591
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 592
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 593
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 594
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 595
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 596
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 597
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 598
common SuperVertex. 599
Definition 3.14. 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 SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 600
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 601
of following conditions hold: 602
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 603
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 604
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 605
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 606
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 607
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 608
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 609
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 610
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 611
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 612
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 613
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E).

a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 615
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 616
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 617
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 618
SuperHyperPath . 619
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 620
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E).

A Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex
(NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
have 622
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 623
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 624
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 625
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 626
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 627
(NSHE)). (Ref. [38],Definition 5.4,p.7). 628
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 630
called 631
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 632
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 633
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 634
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 635
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 636
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 638
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 639
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 641
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 642
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 643
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 644
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 645
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 647
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 648
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 649
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 650
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 651
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 652
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 653
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 654
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 655
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 656
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 657
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 658
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 659
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 661
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 662
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 664
called 665
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 666
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 668
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 669
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 670
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 671
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 672
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 673
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 674
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 677
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 678
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 681
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 682
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 683
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 685
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 686
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 687
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 688
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 690
Extreme coefficient; 691
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 692
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 693
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 695
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 696
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 697
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 698
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 699
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 700
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 701
Neutrosophic coefficient; 702
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 703
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 706
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 707
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 708
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 710
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 711
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 714
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 715
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 718
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 719
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 722
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 723
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 724
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 725
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 727
Extreme coefficient; 728
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 729
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 732
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 733
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 734
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 735
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 736
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 737
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 738
Neutrosophic coefficient. 739
Definition 3.20. ((Neutrosophic/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperDuality). 740
Then 742
(i) an δ−SuperHyperDuality is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 743
SuperHyperDuality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 744
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 745
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ.
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the 746
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 747
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDuality is a Neutrosophic kind of 748
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality such that either of the following Neutrosophic 749
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
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
(3.22)
expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 750
s∈S: 751
|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 (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. 752
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 753
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 754
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality, there’s a need to 755
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 756
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 757
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 758
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 759
pair S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) 760
holds. 761
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 762
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 763
understandable. 764
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 765
pair S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 766
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperDuality, SuperHyperStar, 767
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 768
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality, 769
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 770
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 771
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 772
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 773
Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality 774
more Neutrosophicly understandable. 775

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality, there’s a need to 776
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality”. The 777
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 778
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 779
assign to the values. 780
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperDuality. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 781
SuperHyperDuality if the Table (3) holds. 782
4 Extreme SuperHyperDuality But As The 783
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 784
Forms 785
Example 4.1. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair 786
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 787
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 788
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 789
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 790
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 791
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 792
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 793
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 794
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 795
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 796
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
797
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 800
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 801
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 802
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 803
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 804
Figure 1. The Extreme SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Extreme Notions of

Extreme SuperHyperDuality in the Extreme Example (4.1)
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 805

806
straightforward. 809

810
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .
814




C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
818
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial 6z 8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V3i+17i=0 }.
822
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E15 , E16 , E17 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V3 , V13 , V8 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial =
4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
826




4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
830
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+13i=0 , E23 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V3i+13i=0 , V15 }.
834




4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
838

3 × 3z 2 .
842

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V1 , Vii610=5,7,8 }.
i=4



846

3 × 3z 2 .
850

854



858

(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.
862

(1 × 1 × 2)z.
866




(2 × 2 × 2)z.
870
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+1i=03 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V2i+1i=05 }.
874


878

882

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
886



5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 887
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 888
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 889
SuperHyperClasses. 890
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 891
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 3

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 892
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality .
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 893
Figure 23. an Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme Super-

HyperDuality in the Example (5.2)
There’s a new way to redefine as 894
ViEXT ERN AL ∼ VjEXT ERN AL ≡

∃!Ez ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL ∈ Ez ≡
∃!Ez ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , {ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL } ⊆ Ez .
The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )| ≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 895
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 896
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 898
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 899
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 900
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 901
Then 902
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 3

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z 3 .
Figure 24. an Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperDuality in the Extreme Example (5.4)
Proof. Let 903
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality .
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 904

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 909
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 910
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 911
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 912
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Figure 25. an Extreme SuperHyperStar Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperDuality in the Extreme Example (5.6)
Proof. Let 913
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 914
a new way to redefine as 915

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 919
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 920
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 921
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 922
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 923
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 924
Then 925
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

= {Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
X
=( (min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |)choose|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |)
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
= {ViEXT ERN AL ∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 926
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Emini |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈P ESHG:(V,E) | , Vmin i |Pi
ESHG:(V,E) ∈P ESHG:(V,E) |+1
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 927

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperDuality. Thus the notion of quasi 931
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 932
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 933
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 934
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 935
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 936
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 937
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperDuality in the Example (5.8)
solution 938
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
The latter is straightforward. 939
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 940
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 941
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 942
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 943
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 944
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 945
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 946
ESHM : (V, E). Then 947

= {Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
X
=( (min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |)choose|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |)
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
= {ViEXT ERN AL ∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 948
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme 949
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 950

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 955
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 956
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 957
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 958
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 959
Figure 27. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperDuality in the Example (5.10)
solution 960
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 961
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 962
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 963
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 964
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 965
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 966
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 967
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 968
Then, 969
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
Extreme Cardinality
|z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 970
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2∗ ,
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Extreme Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
Figure 28. an Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperDuality in the Extreme Example (5.12)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 971
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 972

∃!Ez∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
∗
, ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL ∈ Ez∗ ≡
∃!Ez∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
∗
, {ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL } ⊆ Ez∗ .
The unique embedded SuperHyperDuality proposes some longest SuperHyperDuality 977
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 978
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 979
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 980
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 981
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 982
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 983
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 984
Results But As The Initial Motivation 985
For the SuperHyperDuality, extreme SuperHyperDuality, and the Extreme 986
SuperHyperDuality, some general results are introduced. 987
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperDuality is “redefined” on the 988
positions of the alphabets. 989
Corollary 6.2. Assume extreme SuperHyperDuality. Then 990
Extreme SuperHyperDuality =
{theSuperHyperDualityof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperDuality
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperDuality. }
plus one extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 991
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 992
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 993
Corollary 6.3. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 994
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperDuality and SuperHyperDuality 995
coincide. 996
the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is an Extreme 998
SuperHyperDuality if and only if it’s a SuperHyperDuality. 999
the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1001
SuperHyperDuality if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperDuality. 1002
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1003
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperDuality is its 1004
SuperHyperDuality and reversely. 1005
Corollary 6.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperDuality, 1006
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1007
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperDuality is its 1008
SuperHyperDuality and reversely. 1009
Corollary 6.8. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1010
SuperHyperDuality isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperDuality isn’t 1011
well-defined. 1012
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1013
Extreme SuperHyperDuality isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperDuality isn’t 1014
well-defined. 1015
Then its Extreme SuperHyperDuality isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1018
SuperHyperDuality isn’t well-defined. 1019
Corollary 6.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1020
SuperHyperDuality is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperDuality is well-defined. 1021
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1022
its Extreme SuperHyperDuality is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperDuality is 1023
well-defined. 1024
Then its Extreme SuperHyperDuality is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperDuality 1027
is well-defined. 1028
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1029
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1030
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1031
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1032
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1033
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1034
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1035
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1036
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1037
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1038
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1039
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1040
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1041
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1042
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1043
independent SuperHyperSet is 1044
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1045
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1046
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1047
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1048
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1049
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1050
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1051
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperDuality/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a maximal 1052
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1053
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1054
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1055
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1056
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1057
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1058
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1059
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1060
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1061
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1062
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1063
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1064
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1065
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1066
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1067
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1068
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperDuality/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 1070
(i) : the SuperHyperDuality; 1071
(ii) : the SuperHyperDuality; 1072
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDuality; 1073
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDuality; 1074
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDuality; 1075
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDuality. 1076
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1077
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1078
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1080
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDuality; 1081
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperDuality; 1082
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperDuality; 1083
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDuality; 1084
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDuality; 1085
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDuality. 1086
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1087
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1090
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1091
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1092
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1093
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1097
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1098
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1099
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1102
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1103
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1104
is a 1105
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1109
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1110
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1111
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1114
number of 1115
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1119
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1120
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1121
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1122
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1123
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1124
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1126
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1127
(iv) : SuperHyperDuality; 1131
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1132
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1133
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1134
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1135
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1136
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1137
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1138
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1142
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1144
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1145
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1146
setting of dual 1147
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1151
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1152
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1153
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1155
SuperHyperDuality/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1157
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1158
dual 1159
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1163
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1164
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1165
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1167
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1168
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1169
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1175
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1176
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1177
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1178
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1179
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1180
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1181
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1182
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1183
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1184
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality, then 1185
(i) S is SuperHyperDominating set; 1186
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1187
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1188
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1189
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1190
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1191
connected. Then 1192
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1193
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1194
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1195
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1196
SuperHyperDuality; 1197
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1198
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1199
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1200
a dual SuperHyperDuality. 1201
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1202
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1203
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1204
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1205
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1206
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1207
dual SuperHyperDuality. 1208
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperDuality. Then 1209
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1210
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1212
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1213
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1214
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1215
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperDuality. Then 1217
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1218
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1220
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1221
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1222
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1224
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperDuality; 1225
(ii) Γ = 1; 1226
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1227
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperDuality. 1228
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1229
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1230
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1231
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1232
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1233
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1234
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1235
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1236
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1237
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1239
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1240
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1241
SuperHyperDuality. 1242
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1243
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1244
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1245
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 1246
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1247
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1249
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1250
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1251
SuperHyperDuality for N SHF; 1252
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1253
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1254
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1255
SuperHyperDuality for N SHF : (V, E). 1256
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1257
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1258
SuperHyperSet. Then 1259
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1260
SuperHyperDuality for N SHF; 1261
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1262

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1263
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperDuality 1264
for N SHF : (V, E). 1265
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1266
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1267
SuperHyperSet. Then 1268
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality 1269
for N SHF : (V, E); 1270
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1271

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1272
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperDuality for 1273
N SHF : (V, E). 1274
following statements hold; 1276
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1277
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1278
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1280
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality, then S is a dual 1281
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1282
following statements hold; 1284
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1285
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1286
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1288
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperPowerful 1289
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1291
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1292
hold; 1293
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1294
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1295
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1296
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 1298
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1300
r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1301
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] [r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme 1302
SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements hold; 1303
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1304
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1306
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 1308
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1310
r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1311
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1313
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1314
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1316
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1318
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1321
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1323
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1324
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1326
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1328
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality; 1329
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1331
SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperDuality. Then following statements hold; 1333
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1334
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1336
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1338
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1341
SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperDuality. Then following statements hold; 1343
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1344
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1346
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1348
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperDuality. 1351
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1352
Recognition 1353
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1354
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease 1355
is considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1356
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperBipartite
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1357
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some 1358
Extreme treatments for this Extreme disease. 1359
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1360
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1361
long-term Extreme function. 1362
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme 1363
model [it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the 1364
move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the 1365
cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy 1366
and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this 1367
event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] 1368
to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1369
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1370
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1371
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1372
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an Extreme 1373
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperDuality, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 1374
SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the 1375
Extreme SuperHyperDuality or the Extreme SuperHyperDuality in those Extreme 1376
Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1377
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1378
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1379
SuperHyperModel 1380
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1381
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1382
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1383
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1384
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1385
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1386
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1387
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1388
Figure 29. an Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperDuality
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1389
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1390
SuperHyperModel 1391
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1392
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1393
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1394
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1395
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1396
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1397
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1398
is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1399
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1400
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1401
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1402
The SuperHyperDuality and the Extreme SuperHyperDuality are defined on a 1403
real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1404
Figure 30. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperDuality
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1405
recognitions? 1406
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperDuality and 1407
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality? 1408
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1409
compute them? 1410
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1411
SuperHyperDuality and the Extreme SuperHyperDuality? 1412
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperDuality and the Extreme SuperHyperDuality do a 1413
SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on SuperHyperDuality, 1414
are there else? 1415
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1416
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1417
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1418
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1419
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1420
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1421
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1422
highlighted. 1423
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1424
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1425
SuperHyperDuality. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1426
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on the 1427
new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, Extreme 1428
SuperHyperDuality, finds the convenient background to implement some results based 1429
on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme SuperHyperClasses are the cases 1430
of this research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer 1431
to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To 1432
formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperDuality, the new 1433
SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are 1434
gathered in the section on the SuperHyperDuality and the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1435
The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. 1436
In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1437
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 1438
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1439
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1440
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1441
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1442
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1443
formally called “ SuperHyperDuality” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 1444
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1445
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperDuality
3. Extreme SuperHyperDuality 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1446
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1447
References 1448
1. Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1449
SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 1450
10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 1451
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf). 1452
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss journal/vol49/iss1/34). 1453
2. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 1454
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 1455
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 1456
3. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 1457
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 1458
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 1459
(2022) 242-263. 1460
4. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 1461
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 1462
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 1463
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 1464
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 1465
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 1466
5. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 1467
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 1468
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 1469
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 1470
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 1471
6. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 1472
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 1473
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 1474
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 1475
7. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 1476
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 1477
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 1478
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 1479
8. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 1480
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 1481
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 1482
9. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 1483
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 1484
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 1485
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 1486
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 1487
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 1488
10. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 1489
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 1490
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 1491
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 1492
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 1493
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 1494
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 1495
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 1496
12. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 1497
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 1498
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 1499
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 1500
13. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 1501
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 1502
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 1503
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 1504
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 1505
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 1506
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 1507
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 1508
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 1509
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 1510
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 1511
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 1512
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 1513
17. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 1514
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 1515
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010105 (doi: 1516
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 1517
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 1519
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 1520
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 1521
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 1522
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 1523
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 1524
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 1525
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 1526
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 1527
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 1528
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 1529
21. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1530
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 1531
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 1532
22. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 1533
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 1534
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 1535
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 1536
23. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 1537
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 1538
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 1539
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 1540
24. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 1541
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 1542
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 1543
25. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 1544
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 1545
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 1546
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18494.15680). 1547
26. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 1548
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 1549
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 1550
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 1551
27. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 1552
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 1553
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 1554
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 1555
28. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 1556
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 1557
29. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 1559
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 1560
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 1561
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23172.19849). 1562
30. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 1563
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 1564
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 1565
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 1566
31. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 1567
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 1568
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 1571
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 1572
33. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 1573
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 1574
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 1575
34. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 1576
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 1577
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 1578
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 1579
35. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 1580
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 1581
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 1582
36. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 1583
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 1584
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 1585
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 1586
37. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 1587
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 1588
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 1589
38. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 1590
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 1591
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 1592
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 1593
39. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing: 1594
Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 1595
United States. ISBN: 979-1-59973-725-6 1596
(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf). 1597
40. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL 1598
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 1599
33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 1600
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf). 1601
View publication stats

New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition As (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super Mixed-Illustrations

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

New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition As (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super Mixed-Illustrations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition As (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · February 2023

297 PUBLICATIONS 3,155 CITATIONS

On Fuzzy Logic View project

Number Graphs And Numbers View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 2

SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper 3

Imaginations On Super Mixed-Illustrations 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7

In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9

SuperHyperDuality). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 10

ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } 11

and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic 12

e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 13

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such that 14

Va ∈ Ei , Ej and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 15

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such that 16

Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 17

such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 18

|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 19

SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 20

re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic 21

rv-SuperHyperDuality. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). Assume a Neutrosophic 22

SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 23

SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 24

SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 25

re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic 26

rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 27

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 28

of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive 29

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 30

that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if 31

it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 32

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 33

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 34

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 35

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 36

SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 37

Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; an Extreme SuperHyperDuality 38

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 39

re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic 40

rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 41

N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 42

Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 44

consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 45

Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 47

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 48

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 49

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 50

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 51

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 52

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 53

consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 54

corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s 56

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 57

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 58

cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 60

SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 61

a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, 63

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and 64