New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/368504049
New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts
Preprint · February 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11050.90569
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
299 PUBLICATIONS 3,274 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project
Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 15 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 And Neutrosophic 2
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations 3
On Super Sorts 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
SuperHyperJoin). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 10
pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 11
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if 12
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 13
Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 14
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 15
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 16
v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 17
∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if 18
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 19
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 20
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 21
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic 22
rv-SuperHyperJoin. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). Assume a Neutrosophic 23
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 24
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 25
SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 26
re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic 27
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 28
is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 29
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 30
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 31
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 32
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, 33
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 34
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 35
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 36
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 37
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; an Extreme 38
SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 39
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 41
is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 42
Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges 43
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 44
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 45
SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a 46
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 47
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 49
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 50
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 51
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 52
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 53
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 54
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 55
Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 56
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 58
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 59
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive 60
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 61
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s 62
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, 63
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) 64
for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 65
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 66
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 67
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 68
SuperHyperJoin; an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 69
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 70
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 71
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 72
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 73
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet 74
S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 75
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the 76
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 77
SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 78
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 80
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 81
coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 82
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 83
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 84
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 86
coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new 87
SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperJoin and Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 88
Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes 89
further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based 90
on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the 91
whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 92
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 93
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 94
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 95
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 96
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 97
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 98
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 99
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 100
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 101
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 102
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 103
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 104
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 105
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 106
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 107
δ−SuperHyperJoin is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum cardinality 108
such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) cardinalities of 109
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are |S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and 110
|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first Expression, holds if S is an 111
δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds if S is an 112
δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperJoin is a maximal Neutrosophic 113
of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such that either of the 114
following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 115
s ∈ S there are: |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 116
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 117
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 118
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 119
version of a SuperHyperJoin . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 120
SuperHyperJoin more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 121
SuperHyperJoin, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperJoin ”. The 122
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 123
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 124
assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperJoin . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 125
SuperHyperJoin if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, 126
SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic 127
SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 128
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of 129
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The 130
Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 131
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 132
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 133
based on a SuperHyperJoin . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation 134
of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all 135
SuperHyperJoin until the SuperHyperJoin, then it’s officially called a “SuperHyperJoin” 136
but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperJoin . There are some instances about the 137
clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperJoin ”. These two examples 138
get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways 139
of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperJoin . For the sake of having a 140
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 141
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin” and a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin ”. The 142
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 143
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 144
assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 145
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperJoin 146
are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin” if the intended Table holds. It’s 147
useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways 148
to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin more 149
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 150
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 151
SuperHyperJoin, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 152
SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 153
SuperHyperJoin”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic 154
SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic 155
SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a 156
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin” where it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic 157
value from all the SuperHyperJoin amid the maximum value amid all 158
SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperJoin .] SuperHyperJoin . A graph is a 159
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 160
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 161
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 162
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperJoin 163
if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s 164
SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all SuperHyperEdges; 165
it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 166
SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has no 167
SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 168
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi 169
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a SuperHyperWheel if it’s only 170
one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex 171
has one SuperHyperEdge with any common SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel 172
proposes the specific designs and the specific architectures. The SuperHyperModel is 173
officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this 174
SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are 175
SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the common and intended properties 176
between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as 177
“SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some degrees of determinacy, 178
indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise SuperHyperModel which in this case 179
the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In the future research, the foundation 180
will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the results and the definitions will be 181
introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 182
The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and 183
the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the 184
move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, 185
indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that 186
region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Neutrosophic 187
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 188
There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 189
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the cancer 190
on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 191
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperJoin, SuperHyperStar, 192
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 193
either the longest SuperHyperJoin or the strongest SuperHyperJoin in those 194
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperJoin, called 195
SuperHyperJoin, and the strongest SuperHyperJoin, called Neutrosophic 196
SuperHyperJoin, some general results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, 197
all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since 198
it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 199
SuperHyperJoin. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperJoin but literarily, it’s 200
the deformation of any SuperHyperJoin. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A 201
basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and 202
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 203
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperJoin, Cancer’s 204
Neutrosophic Recognition 205
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 206
1 Background 207
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 208
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them date back on January 22, 209
2023. 210
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 211
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step toward the 212
research on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article is published on the 213
journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and the pages 531-561. In this 214
research article, different types of notions like dominating, resolving, coloring, 215
Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, 216
zero forcing number, zero forcing neutrosophic- number, independent number, 217
independent neutrosophic-number, clique number, clique neutrosophic-number, 218
matching number, matching neutrosophic-number, girth, neutrosophic girth, 219
1-zero-forcing number, 1-zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, failed 1-zero-forcing 220
number, failed 1-zero-forcing neutrosophic-number, global- offensive alliance, t-offensive 221
alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, and global-powerful alliance are defined 222
in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of 223
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are cases of research. Some 224
results are applied in family of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 225
Thus this research article has concentrated on the vast notions and introducing the 226
majority of notions. 227
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 228
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 229
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 230
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 231
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 232
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 233
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 234
abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 06-14. 235
The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of 236
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results 237
based on initial background. 238
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 239
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 240
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 241
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 242
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 243
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 244
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 245
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with abbreviation “J Math 246
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 247
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 248
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 249
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 250
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 251
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 252
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 253
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 254
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 255
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 256
in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 257
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 258
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [7] by 259
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 260
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), 261
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 262
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 263
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 264
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [9] by Henry 265
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 266
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 267
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), 268
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 269
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 270
Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 271
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 272
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 273
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 274
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs 275
To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 276
Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 277
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 278
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 279
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 280
Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in 281
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 282
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 283
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 284
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in 285
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [17] by Henry 286
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 287
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 288
in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 289
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 290
Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 291
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 292
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 293
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [20] by 294
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 295
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [21] by 296
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 297
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 298
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 299
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 300
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett 301
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 302
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [24] by Henry 303
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 304
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching 305
Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [25] by Henry 306
Garrett (2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 307
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 308
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [26] by Henry 309
Garrett (2023), “Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of 310
Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s 311
Recognition called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [27] by Henry Garrett 312
(2023), “Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 313
Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 314
Ref. [28] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every 315
Embedded Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 316
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in 317
Ref. [29] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 318
Regions titled neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 319
Recognition modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [30] by 320
Henry Garrett (2023), “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 321
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 322
Ref. [31] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 323
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 324
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [32] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) 325
SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled 326
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [33] by Henry Garrett (2023), 327
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 328
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 329
in Ref. [34] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in 330
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [35] by Henry 331
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 332
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 333
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [36] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions 334
Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 335
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [37] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of 336
Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on 337
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in 338
Ref. [38] by Henry Garrett (2022), there are some endeavors to formalize the basic 339
SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 340
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 341
proposed as book in Ref. [39] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 342
Scholar and has more than 3230 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 343
Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st 344
Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research book covers different 345
types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 346
SuperHyperGraph theory. 347
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 348
proposed as book in Ref. [40] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 349
Scholar and has more than 4117 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 350
and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell 351
Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This research book presents different 352
types of notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of 353
duality in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This 354
research book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 355
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 356
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 357
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 358
framework of Extreme SuperHyperJoin theory, Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin theory, 359
and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–38]. Two popular scientific research 360
books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 3230 and 4117 respectively, on 361
neutrosophic science is on [39, 40]. 362
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 363
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 364
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 365
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 366
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 367
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 368
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 369
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 370
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 371
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 372
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 373
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 374
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 375
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 376
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 377
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 378
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 379
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 380
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 381
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 382
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 383
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 384
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 385
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 386
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 387
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 388
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 389
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 390
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 391
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 392
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 393
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 394
formally called “ SuperHyperJoin” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix 395
“SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the background 396
for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 397
The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and 398
the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the 399
move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, 400
indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that 401
region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Neutrosophic 402
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 403
There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 404
some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and 405
between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic 406
SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperJoin, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 407
SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the optimal 408
SuperHyperJoin or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in those Neutrosophic 409
SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 410
SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two 411
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 412
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperJoin. There isn’t any formation of 413
any SuperHyperJoin but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperJoin. It, 414
literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 415
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 416
find the “ amount of SuperHyperJoin” of either individual of cells or the groups of cells 417
based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 418
SuperHyperJoin” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of cells? 419
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 420
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 421
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 422
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 423
SuperHyperJoin” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin” on “SuperHyperGraph” and 424
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more motivations to 425
define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this SuperHyperNotion 426
with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some instances and examples to 427
make clarifications about the framework of this research. The general results and some 428
results about some connections are some avenues to make key point of this research, 429
“Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 430
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 431
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 432
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 433
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 434
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 435
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 436
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperJoin and 437
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperJoin” and 438
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in order 439
to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and 440
Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, 441
corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, 442
titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 443
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 444
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 445
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 446
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 447
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 448
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 449
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 450
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 451
SuperHyperJoin”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” 452
and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about 453
what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this 454
research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for 455
this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperJoin”. The keyword of this research 456
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 457
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 458
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 459
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 460
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 461
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 462
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 463
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 464
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 465
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 466
Research On the Redeemed Ways 467
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 468
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [38],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [38],Definition 469
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [38],Definition 2.5,p.2), 470
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [38],Definition 471
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [38], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 472
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [38],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 473
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [38],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 474
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 475
(Ref. [38],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 476
to Ref. [38]. 477
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 478
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 479
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [38],Definition 2.1,p.1). 480
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 481
+
]− 0, 1 [. 482
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [38],Definition 2.2,p.2). 483
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 484
2.5,p.2). 485
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 486
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 487
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 488
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 489
1, 2, . . . , n); 490
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 491
V; 492
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 493
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 494
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 495
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 496
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 497
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 498
(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 . 499
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 500
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 501
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 502
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 503
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 504
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 505
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 506
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 507
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 508
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 509
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 510
(Ref. [38],Definition 2.7,p.3). 511
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 512
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 513
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 514
could be characterized as follow-up items. 515
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 516
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 517
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 518
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 519
HyperEdge; 520
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 521
SuperEdge; 522
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 523
SuperHyperEdge. 524
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 525
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 526
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [38], Definition 2.7, p.3). 527
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 528
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 529
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 530
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 531
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 532
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 533
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)). 534
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 535
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 536
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 537
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 538
1, 2, . . . , n); 539
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 540
V; 541
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 542
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 543
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 544
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 545
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 546
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 547
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 548
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 549
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 550
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 551
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 552
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 553
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 554
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 555
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 556
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 557
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 558
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 561
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 562
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 564
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 565
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 566
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 567
HyperEdge; 568
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 569
SuperEdge; 570
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 571
SuperHyperEdge. 572
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 573
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 574
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 575
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 576
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 577
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 578
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 579
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 580
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 581
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 582
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 583
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 584
given SuperHyperEdges; 585
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 586
SuperHyperEdges; 587
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 588
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 589
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 590
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 591
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 592
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 593
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 594
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 595
common SuperVertex. 596
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 597
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 598
of following conditions hold: 599
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 600
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 601
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 602
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 603
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 604
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 605
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 606
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 607
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 608
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 609
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 610
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; 612
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 613
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 614
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 615
SuperHyperPath . 616
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 617
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 619
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 620
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 621
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 622
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 623
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 624
(NSHE)). (Ref. [38],Definition 5.4,p.7). 625
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 627
called 628
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 629
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 630
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 631
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 632
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 633
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 635
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 636
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 638
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 639
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 640
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 641
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 642
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 644
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 645
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 646
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 647
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 648
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 649
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 650
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 651
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 652
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 653
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 654
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 655
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 656
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 657
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 658
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 659
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 661
called 662
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 663
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 664
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 665
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 666
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 667
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 668
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 669
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 670
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 671
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 673
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 674
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 675
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 678
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 679
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 682
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 683
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 684
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 685
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 687
coefficient; 688
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 689
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 692
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 693
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 694
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 695
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 696
coefficient; 699
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 700
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 703
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 704
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 705
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 707
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 708
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 711
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 712
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 715
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 716
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 719
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 720
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 721
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 722
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 724
coefficient; 725
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 726
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 729
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 730
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 731
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 732
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 733
coefficient. 736
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperJoin). 737
Then 739
(i) an δ−SuperHyperJoin is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin 740
such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 741
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 742
|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 743
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 744
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperJoin is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 745
SuperHyperJoin such that either of the following Neutrosophic expressions hold 746
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)
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 747
|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. 748
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 749
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 750
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, there’s a need to “redefine” 751
the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 752
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 753
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 754
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 755
pair S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) 756
holds. 757
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 758
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 759
understandable. 760
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 761
pair S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 762
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperJoin, SuperHyperStar, 763
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 764
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, 765
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 766
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 767
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 768
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 769
Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin 770
more Neutrosophicly understandable. 771
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, there’s a need to “redefine” 772
the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin”. The SuperHyperVertices 773

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 774
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 775
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperJoin. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 776
SuperHyperJoin if the Table (3) holds. 777
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 778
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 779
Forms 780
Example 4.1. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair 781
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 782
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 783
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 784
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 785
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 786
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 787
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 788
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 789
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 790
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 791
SuperHyperJoin. 792
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
793
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 796
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 797
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 798
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 799
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 800
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 801
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in the Neutrosophic Example (4.1)
SuperHyperJoin. 802

803
straightforward. 806

807
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .
811




C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
815
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial 6z 8 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V3i+17i=0 }.
819
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E15 , E16 , E17 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V3 , V13 , V8 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial =
4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
823




4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
827
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+13i=0 , E23 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V3i+13i=0 , V15 }.
831


Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in the Neutrosophic Example (4.1)

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
835

3 × 3z 2 .
839

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



843

3 × 3z 2 .
847

851



855

(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .
859

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .
863




C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .
867
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+1i=03 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V2i+1i=05 }.
871


875

879

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
883



5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 884
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 885
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 886
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 887
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 888
Then 889
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 890
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
3 3
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperJoin in the Example (5.2)
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 891
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 892
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 893
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 894
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 896
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 897
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 898
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 899
Then 900

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .

.
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

Proof. Let 901
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 902
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 903

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 907
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 908
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 909
SuperHyperJoin. 910
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 911
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in the Neutrosophic Example (5.6)
Then 912
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 913
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 914
There’s a new way to redefine as 915

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

= (PERFECT MATCHING).
{Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) ,
∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
If ∃Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | =
6 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
where ∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) |
= min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
= {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) |
Neutrosophic 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 Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 927
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 928

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 931
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 932
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in the Example (5.8)
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 SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 935
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 936
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 937
solution 938
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
The latter is straightforward. 939
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 940
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 941
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 942
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 943
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 944
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 945
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 946
ESHM : (V, E). Then 947

{Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) ,
∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
If ∃Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | =
6 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
where ∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) |
= min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
= {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) |
Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 948
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 949
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 950

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 953
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 954
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in the Example (5.10)
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 Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 957
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 958
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 959
solution 960
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 961
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 962
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 963
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 964
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 965
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 966
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 967
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 968
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 969
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 970

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .

.
Proof. Let 971
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 972
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 973

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 976
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 977
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 978
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 979
Example 5.12. In the Neutrosophic Figure (28), the connected Neutrosophic 980
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 981
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 982
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 983
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 984
SuperHyperJoin. 985
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 986
Results But As The Initial Motivation 987
For the SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, and the Neutrosophic 988
SuperHyperJoin, some general results are introduced. 989
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin is “redefined” on the 990
positions of the alphabets. 991
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin in the Neutrosophic Example (5.12)
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. Then 992
N eutrosophic SuperHyperJoin =
{theSuperHyperJoinof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperJoin
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperJoin. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 993
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 994
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 995
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 996
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin and SuperHyperJoin 997
coincide. 998
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1000
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if and only if it’s a SuperHyperJoin. 1001
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1003
SuperHyperJoin if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperJoin. 1004
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1005
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin is its 1006
SuperHyperJoin and reversely. 1007
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperJoin, 1008
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1009
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin is its 1010
SuperHyperJoin and reversely. 1011
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1012
SuperHyperJoin isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperJoin isn’t well-defined. 1013
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1014
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperJoin isn’t 1015
well-defined. 1016
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1018
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1019
SuperHyperJoin isn’t well-defined. 1020
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1021
SuperHyperJoin is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperJoin is well-defined. 1022
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1023
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperJoin 1024
is well-defined. 1025
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1027
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperJoin 1028
is well-defined. 1029
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1030
is 1031
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1032
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1033
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1034
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1035
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1036
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1037
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1038
∅ is 1039
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1040
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1041
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1042
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1043
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1044
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1045
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1046
independent SuperHyperSet is 1047
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1048
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1049
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1050
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1051
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1052
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1053
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1054
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperJoin/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a maximal 1055
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1056
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1057
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1058
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1059
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1060
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1061
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1062
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1063
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1064
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1065
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1066
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1067
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1068
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1069
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1070
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1071
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperJoin/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 1073
(i) : the SuperHyperJoin; 1074
(ii) : the SuperHyperJoin; 1075
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperJoin; 1076
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperJoin; 1077
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperJoin; 1078
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperJoin. 1079
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1080
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1081
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1083
(i) : the dual SuperHyperJoin; 1084
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperJoin; 1085
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperJoin; 1086
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperJoin; 1087
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperJoin; 1088
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperJoin. 1089
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1090
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1093
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1094
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1095
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1096
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1100
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1101
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1102
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1105
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1106
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1107
is a 1108
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1112
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1113
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1114
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1117
number of 1118
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1122
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1123
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1124
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1125
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1126
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1127
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1129
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1130
(iv) : SuperHyperJoin; 1134
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1135
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1136
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1137
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1138
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1139
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1140
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1141
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1145
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1147
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1149
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1150
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1154
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1155
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1156
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1158
SuperHyperJoin/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is O(ESHG : (V, E)) 1160
and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a dual 1161
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1165
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1166
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1167
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1169
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1170
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1171
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1177
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1178
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1179
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1180
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1181
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1182
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1183
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1184
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1185
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1186
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1187
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin, then 1188
(i) S is SuperHyperDominating set; 1189
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1190
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1191
Then 1192
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1193
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1194
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1195
which is connected. Then 1196
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1197
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1198
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1199
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1200
SuperHyperJoin; 1201
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1202
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1203
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1204
a dual SuperHyperJoin. 1205
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1206
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1207
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1208
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1209
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1210
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1211
dual SuperHyperJoin. 1212
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperJoin. Then 1213
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1214
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1216
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1217
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1218
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1219
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperJoin. Then 1221
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1222
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1224
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1225
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1226
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1228
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperJoin; 1229
(ii) Γ = 1; 1230
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1231
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperJoin. 1232
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1233
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1234
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1235
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1236
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1237
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1238
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1239
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1240
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1241
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1242
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1243
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1244
SuperHyperJoin. 1245
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1246
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1247
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1248

bnc ; 1249
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1250
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1252
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1253
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1254
SuperHyperJoin for N SHF; 1255
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1256
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1257
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1258
SuperHyperJoin for N SHF : (V, E). 1259
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1260
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1261
SuperHyperSet. Then 1262
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1263
SuperHyperJoin for N SHF; 1264
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1265

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1266
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperJoin for 1267
N SHF : (V, E). 1268
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1269
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1270
SuperHyperSet. Then 1271
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin 1272
for N SHF : (V, E); 1273
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1274

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1275
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperJoin for 1276
N SHF : (V, E). 1277
Then following statements hold; 1279
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1280
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1281
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1283
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperDefensive 1284
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1288
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1289
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1291
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperPowerful 1292
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1294
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1295
statements hold; 1296
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1297
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1298
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1299
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 1301
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1303
r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1304
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1305
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1306
statements hold; 1307
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1308
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1310
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an r-SuperHyperDefensive 1312
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1314
r-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1315
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1317
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1318
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1319
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c
+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1321
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1323
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1326
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1328
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1329
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1330
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| >b O−1

2 c
+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1332
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1334
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin; 1335
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1337
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperJoin. 1339
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1341
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1343
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1345
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1348
[r-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperJoin. 1350
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1352
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1354
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1356
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperJoin. 1359
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1360
Neutrosophic Recognition 1361
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1362
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1363
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1364
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1365
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1366
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1367
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1368
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1369
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1370
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1371
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1372
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1373
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1374
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1375
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1376
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1377
happened and what’s done. 1378
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1379
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1380
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1381
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1382
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperJoin, SuperHyperStar, 1383
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1384
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin 1385
in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1386
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1387
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1388
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1389
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1390
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1391
featured. 1392
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

sophic SuperHyperJoin
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1393
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1394
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1395
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1396
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the 1397
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (29), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 1398
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1399
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1400
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1401
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1402
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1403
Neutrosophic featured. 1404
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1405
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1406
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1407
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1408
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1409
SuperHyperModel (30), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 1410
Figure 30. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1411
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1412
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1413
The SuperHyperJoin and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin are defined on a 1414
real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1415
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1416
recognitions? 1417
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperJoin and the 1418
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin? 1419
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1420
compute them? 1421
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1422
SuperHyperJoin and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin? 1423
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperJoin and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin do a 1424
SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on SuperHyperJoin, 1425
are there else? 1426
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1427
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1428
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1429
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1430
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1431
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1432
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1433
highlighted. 1434
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1435
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1436
SuperHyperJoin. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1437
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1438
the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1439
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin, finds the convenient background to implement some 1440
results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic 1441
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1442
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1443
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1444
SuperHyperJoin, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. 1445
Some general results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperJoin and the 1446
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have 1447
taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the 1448
lines containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1449
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both 1450
bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on 1451
the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the 1452
SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the 1453
moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 1454
and the architecture are formally called “ SuperHyperJoin” in the themes of jargons 1455
and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 1456
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperJoin
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1457
avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1458
References 1459
1. Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1460
SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 1461
10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 1462
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf). 1463
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss journal/vol49/iss1/34). 1464
2. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 1465
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 1466
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 1467
3. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 1468
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 1469
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 1470
(2022) 242-263. 1471
4. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 1472
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 1473
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 1474
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 1475
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 1476
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 1477
5. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 1478
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 1479
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 1480
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 1481
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 1482
6. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 1483
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 1484
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 1485
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 1486
7. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 1487
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 1488
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 1489
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 1490
8. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 1491
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 1492
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 1493
9. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 1494
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 1495
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 1496
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 1497
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 1498
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 1499
10. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 1500
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 1501
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 1502
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 1503
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 1504
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 1505
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 1506
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 1507
12. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 1508
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 1509
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 1510
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 1511
13. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 1512
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 1513
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 1514
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 1515
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 1516
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 1517
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 1518
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 1519
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 1520
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 1521
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 1522
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 1523
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 1524
17. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 1525
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 1526
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010105 (doi: 1527
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 1528
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 1530
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 1531
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 1532
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 1533
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 1534
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 1535
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 1536
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 1537
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 1538
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 1539
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 1540
21. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1541
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 1542
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 1543
22. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 1544
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 1545
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 1546
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 1547
23. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 1548
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 1549
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 1550
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 1551
24. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 1552
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 1553
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 1554
25. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 1555
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 1556
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 1557
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18494.15680). 1558
26. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 1559
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 1560
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 1561
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 1562
27. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 1563
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 1564
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 1565
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 1566
28. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 1567
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 1568
29. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 1570
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 1571
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 1572
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23172.19849). 1573
30. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 1574
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 1575
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 1576
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 1577
31. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 1578
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 1579
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 1582
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 1583
33. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 1584
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 1585
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 1586
34. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 1587
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 1588
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 1589
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 1590
35. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 1591
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 1592
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 1593
36. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 1594
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 1595
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 1596
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 1597
37. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 1598
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 1599
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 1600
38. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 1601
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 1602
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 1603
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 1604
39. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing: 1605
Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 1606
United States. ISBN: 979-1-59973-725-6 1607
(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf). 1608
40. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL 1609
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 1610
33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 1611
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf). 1612
View publication stats

New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts

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 and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · February 2023

299 PUBLICATIONS 3,274 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project

Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations 3

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

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

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

E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if 12

∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 13

Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 14

such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 15

|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 16

v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 17

∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if 18

∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 19

Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 20

Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 21

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic 22

rv-SuperHyperJoin. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). Assume a Neutrosophic 23

SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 24

SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 25

SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 26

re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic 27

rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 28

is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 29

cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 30

Extreme SuperHyperJoin; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 32

e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, 33

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 34

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 35

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 36

Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 37

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; an Extreme 38

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

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic 40

rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 41

is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 42

Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges 43

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

SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a 46

Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 47

e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, 48

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 49

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

the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 51

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 52

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 53

SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 54

Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 55

Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 56

e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, 57

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 58

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 59

of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive 60

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 61

that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s 62