New Ideas On Super Relations by Hyper Identifications of SuperHyperColoring in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/368686111
New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identiﬁcations Of SuperHyperColoring

In Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph
Preprint · February 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34106.47047
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
327 PUBLICATIONS 4,118 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Fuzzy Logic View project
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 22 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 On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 2
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With 3
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperColoring). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 10
ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } 11
and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic 12
e-SuperHyperColoring if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); Neutrosophic 13
re-SuperHyperColoring if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); and 14
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 15
v-SuperHyperColoring if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); 16
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that 17
d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 18
Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, 19
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and 20
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperColoring). Assume a 21
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a 22
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 23
Extreme SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, 24
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 26
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 27
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive 28
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 29
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperColoring; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring 30
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic 31
re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic 32
rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 33
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 34
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 35
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 36
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; an Extreme SuperHyperColoring 37
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, 38
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 41
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 42
Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 43
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 44
form the Extreme SuperHyperColoring; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 45
Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 46
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 47
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and 48
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 49
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 50
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 51
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 52
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 53
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; and the Neutrosophic power is 54
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring if it’s 55
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 56
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 58
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 59
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 60
and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 61
SuperHyperColoring; a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of 62
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 63
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 65
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 66
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 67
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 68
Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; an Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring 69
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 73
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 74
Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 75
cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices 76
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperColoring; and the Extreme power is 77
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring 78
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 81
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 82
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 83
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 84
Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 87
Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new 88
SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperColoring and Neutrosophic 89
SuperHyperColoring. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them 90
but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and 91
SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature 92
review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the 93
significancy of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 94
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions 95
are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with 96
different tools. The applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical 97
aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to 98
figure out the challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special 99
case is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. 100
Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. 101
These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 102
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 103
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 104
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 105
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 106
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 107
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 108
δ−SuperHyperColoring is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 109
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 110
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 111
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 112
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 113
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperColoring is a maximal 114
Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such 115
that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 116
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 117
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 118
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 119
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 120
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 121
version of a SuperHyperColoring . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 122
SuperHyperColoring more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 123
SuperHyperColoring, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperColoring 124
”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from 125
the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels 126
to assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperColoring . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 127
SuperHyperColoring if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, 128
SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic 129
SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 130
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of 131
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The 132
Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 133
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 134
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 135
based on a SuperHyperColoring . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the 136
foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to 137
have all SuperHyperColoring until the SuperHyperColoring, then it’s officially called a 138
“SuperHyperColoring” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperColoring . There are some 139
instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperColoring ”. 140
These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 141
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperColoring . For the 142
sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring, there’s a need to “redefine” the 143
notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring” and a “Neutrosophic 144
SuperHyperColoring ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned 145
by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of 146
the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 147
It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a 148
SuperHyperColoring are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring” if the 149
intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. 150
Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic 151
SuperHyperColoring more understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 152
There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus 153
SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperColoring, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 154
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 155
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring”, “Neutrosophic 156
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 157
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 158
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring” where it’s the 159
strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperColoring amid the 160
maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperColoring .] 161
SuperHyperColoring . A graph is a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and 162
the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic 163
SuperHyperGraph. There are some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath 164
if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two 165
exceptions; it’s SuperHyperColoring if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 166
two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as 167
intersection amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one 168
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 169
forming two separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s 170
SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 171
SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, has no 172
SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as 173
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one 174
SuperHyperEdge with any common SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the 175
specific designs and the specific architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called 176
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, 177
The “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as 178
“SuperHyperVertices” and the common and intended properties between “specific” cells 179
and “specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. 180
Sometimes, it’s useful to have some degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and 181
neutrality to have more precise SuperHyperModel which in this case the 182
SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In the future research, the foundation will 183
be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the results and the definitions will be 184
introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 185
The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and 186
the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the 187
move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, 188
indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that 189
region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Neutrosophic 190
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 191
There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 192
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the cancer 193
on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 194
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperColoring, SuperHyperStar, 195
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 196
either the longest SuperHyperColoring or the strongest SuperHyperColoring in those 197
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperColoring, called 198
SuperHyperColoring, and the strongest SuperHyperColoring, called Neutrosophic 199
SuperHyperColoring, some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 200
SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s 201
not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style 202
of a SuperHyperColoring. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperColoring but 203
literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperColoring. It, literarily, deforms and it 204
doesn’t form. A basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring theory, 205
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 206
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperColoring, Cancer’s 207
Neutrosophic Recognition 208
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 209
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 210
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 211
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 212
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 213
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 214
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 215
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 216
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 217
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 218
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 219
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 220
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 221
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 222
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 223
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 224
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 225
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 226
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 227
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 228
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 229
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 230
called “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 231
to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 232
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 233
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 234
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 235
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 236
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 237
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 238
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 239
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 240
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 241
formally called “ SuperHyperColoring” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 242
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 243
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 244
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 245
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 246
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 247
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 248
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 249
Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 250
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 251
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 252
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 253
Extreme SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperColoring, SuperHyperStar, 254
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 255
either the optimal SuperHyperColoring or the Extreme SuperHyperColoring in those 256
Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 257
SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme SuperHyperPath s have only two 258
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 259
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperColoring. There isn’t any 260
formation of any SuperHyperColoring but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 261
SuperHyperColoring. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 262
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 263
find the “ amount of SuperHyperColoring” of either individual of cells or the groups of 264
cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 265
SuperHyperColoring” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of 266
cells? 267
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 268
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 269
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 270
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 271
SuperHyperColoring” and “Extreme SuperHyperColoring” on “SuperHyperGraph” and 272
“Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more motivations to define 273
SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this SuperHyperNotion with 274
other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some instances and examples to make 275
clarifications about the framework of this research. The general results and some results 276
about some connections are some avenues to make key point of this research, “Cancer’s 277
Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 278
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 279
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 280
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are 281
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 282
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 283
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 284
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperColoring and 285
Extreme SuperHyperColoring, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperColoring” and 286
“Extreme SuperHyperColoring”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in order 287
to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and 288
Extreme SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 289
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 290
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to 291
origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to extend 292
the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph, 293
in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme 294
SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general SuperHyperRelations and 295
as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are contained in the section 296
“General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are 297
well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, 298
“General Results”, “ SuperHyperColoring”, “Extreme SuperHyperColoring”, “Results on 299
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious 300
questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about 301
excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description 302
and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperColoring”. The 303
keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” 304
with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite 305
as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 306
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 307
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 308
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 309
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 310
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 311
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 312
3 Extreme Preliminaries Of This Scientific 313
Research On the Redeemed Ways 314
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 315
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [96],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [96],Definition 316
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [96],Definition 2.5,p.2), 317
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [96],Definition 318
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [96], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 319
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [96],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 320
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [96],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 321
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 322
(Ref. [96],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 323
to Ref. [96]. 324
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 325
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 326
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [96],Definition 2.1,p.1). 327
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 328
+
]− 0, 1 [. 329
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [96],Definition 2.2,p.2). 330
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. [96],Definition 331
2.5,p.2). 332
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 333
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 334
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 335
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 336
1, 2, . . . , n); 337
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 338
V; 339
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 340
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 341
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 342
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 343
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 344
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 345
(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 . 346
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 347
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 348
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 349
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 350
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 351
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 352
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 353
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 354
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 355
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 356
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 357
(Ref. [96],Definition 2.7,p.3). 358
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 359
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 360
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 361
could be characterized as follow-up items. 362
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 363
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 364
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 365
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 366
HyperEdge; 367
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 368
SuperEdge; 369
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 370
SuperHyperEdge. 371
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 372
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 373
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [96], Definition 2.7, p.3). 374
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 375
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 376
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 377
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 378
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 379
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 380
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)). 381
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 382
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 383
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 384
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 385
1, 2, . . . , n); 386
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 387
V; 388
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 389
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 390
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 391
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 392
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 393
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 394
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 395
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 396
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 397
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 398
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 399
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 400
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 401
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 402
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 403
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 404
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 405
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 408
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 409
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 411
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 412
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 413
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 414
HyperEdge; 415
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 416
SuperEdge; 417
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 418
SuperHyperEdge. 419
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 420
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 421
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 422
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 423
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 424
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 425
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 426
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 427
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 428
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 429
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 430
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 431
given SuperHyperEdges; 432
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 433
SuperHyperEdges; 434
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 435
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 436
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 437
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 438
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 439
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 440
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 441
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 442
common SuperVertex. 443
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 444
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 445
of following conditions hold: 446
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 447
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 448
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 449
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 450
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 451
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 452
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 453
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 454
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 455
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 456
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 457
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; 459
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 460
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 461
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 462
SuperHyperPath . 463
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 464
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 466
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 467
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 468
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 469
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 470
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 471
(NSHE)). (Ref. [96],Definition 5.4,p.7). 472
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 474
called 475
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 476
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 477
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 478
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 479
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 480
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 482
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 483
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 485
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 486
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 487
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 488
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring). 489
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 491
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 492
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that 493
d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); 494
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that 495
d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); and 496
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 497
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that 498
d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); 499
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that 500
d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); and 501
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 502
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic 503
e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic 504
v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring. 505
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperColoring). 506
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 508
called 509
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic 510
v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) 512
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 513
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 514
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 515
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 516
Extreme SuperHyperColoring; 517
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic 518
for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 521
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 522
Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; 525
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 526
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 527
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring 528
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 529
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 530
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 531
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 532
Extreme SuperHyperColoring; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 534
Extreme coefficient; 535
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 536
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic 537
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 540
Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 541
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 542
Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded 545
to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 546
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic 547
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 552
Extreme SuperHyperColoring; 554
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic 555
for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 558
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 559
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 560
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 561
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; 562
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 563
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 564
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring 565
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 566
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 568
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 569
Extreme SuperHyperColoring; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 571
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 573
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic 574
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 577
Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 578
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 579
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 580
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 581
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; and the Neutrosophic power is 582
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 583
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperColoring). 584
Then 586
(i) an δ−SuperHyperColoring is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 587
SuperHyperColoring such that either of the following expressions hold for the 588
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 589
|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 590
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 591
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperColoring is a Neutrosophic kind of 592
Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring such that either of the following Neutrosophic 593
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, Mentioned in the Definition
(3.22)
expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 594
s∈S: 595
|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. 596
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 597
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 598
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring, there’s a need to 599
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 600
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 601
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 602
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 603
pair S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) 604
holds. 605
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 606
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 607
understandable. 608
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 609
pair S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 610
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperColoring, SuperHyperStar, 611
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 612
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 613
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 614
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 615
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 616
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring. 617
Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring 618
more Neutrosophicly understandable. 619

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring, there’s a need to 620
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring”. The 621
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 622
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 623
assign to the values. 624
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperColoring. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 625
SuperHyperColoring if the Table (3) holds. 626
4 Extreme SuperHyperColoring But As The 627
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 628
Forms 629
Example 4.1. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair 630
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 631
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 632
SuperHyperColoring, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 633
E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 634
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 635
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, 636
E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 637
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as a Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 638
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 639
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i6=4 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
640
E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Extreme 643
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 644
only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 645
V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as a 646
Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every 647
Figure 1. The Extreme SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Extreme Notions of

Extreme SuperHyperColoring in the Extreme Example (16.3)
given Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 648

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i6=4 .
649

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }3i=1 .
652
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i6=1,2 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }Vi 6=H,V4 ,O .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial =
= 3 × 4z 5 .
655



C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }4i=1 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }8i=5 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial
= sz 5 .
658
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i=1,2,3 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = az 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i=1,2,3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = bz 3 .
661
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring =

{Ei , E12 , E14 , E17 }11
i=7 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i=8,9,10,11,14 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 5 .
664



C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i=1,4 .

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi , V14 }11
i=8 .
667
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i=1,2,13 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = az 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }22
i=11 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = z 11 .
670
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i=1,4,5,6 .

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi , V14 }11
i=8 .
673



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i=1,6,7,8 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i6=4,5,6 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z 3 .
676
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }6i=1 .

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i6=4,5,6,9,10 .
= 5z 6 .
679
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring = {Ei }i6=1,9,10 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }i6=4,6 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial
= 6z 4 .
682



C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {E1 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {V1 , V2 }.
685

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {V1 , V2 }.
688

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {V1 , Vi }17
i=8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = az 10 .
691




i=8 .
694

i=8 .
697

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }Vi ∈E8 .
700




C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial
= ten choose two z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }Vi ∈E8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = az |E8 | .
703
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring = {E1 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring = {Vi }ViN SHG .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial = z 10 .
706

C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring
= {Vi }Vi ∈E3 .
= az 12 .
709



5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 710
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 711
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 712
SuperHyperClasses. 713
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 714
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperColoring = {Ei , Ei+1 }.

= (|EN SHG | − 1)z 2 .
= {Vi }Vi ∈Ei ||Ei |=maxEj ∈EN SHG |Ej | .
= az |Ei |=maxEj ∈EN SHG |Ej | .
Proof. Let 715
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 .
716
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|E i |=maxE ∈E |Ej | , E1 ,
j N SHG
Figure 23. a Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme Super-

HyperColoring in the Example (16.5)
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 717
There’s a new way to redefine as 718
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 719
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperColoring. The latter is 720
straightforward. 721
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 722
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 723
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperColoring. 724
There are two notions on SuperHyperColoring in SuperHyperCycle. Twin and 725
antipodal. The first is about having the same SuperHyperNeighborhoods and the latter 726
is having the same SuperHyperDistance but both could not be out of the any given 727
SuperHyperColoring easily. All Twin SuperHyperVertices could not be out of the any 728
given SuperHyperColoring and one of them could be out but the latter have to be 729
inside. All Antipodal SuperHyperVertices could not be out of the any given 730
SuperHyperColoring and one of them could be out but the latter have to be inside. and 731
one of them could be out but the latter have to be inside. The proof for both of the is 732
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 734
Then 735

= (|EN SHG |)z 2 .
Proof. Let 736
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 .
737
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|E i |=maxE ∈E |Ej | , E1 ,
j N SHG
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 738

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 743
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 744
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 745
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 746

= |EN SHG | choose twoz 2 .
Figure 24. a Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperColoring in the Extreme Example (16.7)
Proof. Let 747
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 .
748
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|E i |=maxE ∈E |Ej | , E1 ,
j N SHG
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 749
a new way to redefine as 750

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 754
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 755
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 756
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 757
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 758
Figure 25. a Extreme SuperHyperStar Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperColoring in the Extreme Example (16.9)
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 759
Then 760

∗ s
= |EN SHG | choose sz .
Proof. Let 761
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 .
762
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|E i |=maxE ∈E |Ej | , E1
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 763

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperColoring. Thus the notion of 767
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperColoring could be 768
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 769
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 770
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperColoring taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 771
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 772
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 773
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
The latter is straightforward. 774
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 775
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 776
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 777
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 778
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 779
Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 780
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 781
ESHM : (V, E). Then 782

∗ s
= |EN SHG | choose sz .
Proof. Let 783
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 .
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperColoring in the Example (16.11)
784
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|E i |=maxE ∈E |Ej | , E1
j N SHG
is a longest SuperHyperColoring taken from a connected Extreme 785
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 786

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperColoring. Thus the notion of 789
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperColoring could be 790
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 791
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 793
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 794
Figure 27. a Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperColoring in the Example (16.13)
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 795
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 796
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 797
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 798
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 799
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 800
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 801
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 802
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 803
Then, 804

∗ 2
= |EN SHG | choose twoz .
Proof. Let 805
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 .
Figure 28. a Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperColoring in the Extreme Example (16.15)
806
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|E i |=maxE ∈E |Ej | , E1 .
j N SHG
is a longest SuperHyperColoring taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 807
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 808

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperColoring. Thus the notion of 811
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperColoring could be 812
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperColoring proposes some longest 813
SuperHyperColoring excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 814
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 816
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 817
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 818
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 819
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 820
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 821
Results But As The Initial Motivation 822
For the SuperHyperColoring, Extreme SuperHyperColoring, and the Extreme 823
SuperHyperColoring, some general results are introduced. 824
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperColoring is “redefined” on the 825
positions of the alphabets. 826
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperColoring. Then 827
Extreme SuperHyperColoring =
{theSuperHyperColoringof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperColoring
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperColoring. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 828
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 829
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 830
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 831
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperColoring and SuperHyperColoring 832
coincide. 833
the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a Extreme 835
SuperHyperColoring if and only if it’s a SuperHyperColoring. 836
the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 838
SuperHyperColoring if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperColoring. 839
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 840
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperColoring is its 841
SuperHyperColoring and reversely. 842
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperColoring, 843
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 844
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperColoring is its 845
SuperHyperColoring and reversely. 846
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 847
SuperHyperColoring isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperColoring isn’t 848
well-defined. 849
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 850
Extreme SuperHyperColoring isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperColoring 851
isn’t well-defined. 852
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 854
Then its Extreme SuperHyperColoring isn’t well-defined if and only if its 855
SuperHyperColoring isn’t well-defined. 856
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 857
SuperHyperColoring is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperColoring is well-defined. 858
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 859
Extreme SuperHyperColoring is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperColoring is 860
well-defined. 861
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 863
Then its Extreme SuperHyperColoring is well-defined if and only if its 864
SuperHyperColoring is well-defined. 865
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 866
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 867
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 868
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 869
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 870
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 871
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 872
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 873
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 874
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 875
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 876
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 877
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 878
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 879
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 880
independent SuperHyperSet is 881
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 882
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 883
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 884
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 885
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 886
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 887
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperUniform 888
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperColoring/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 889
maximal 890
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 891
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 892
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 893
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 894
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 895
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 896
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 897
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 898
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 899
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 900
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 901
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 902
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 903
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 904
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 905
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 906
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperColoring/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 908
(i) : the SuperHyperColoring; 909
(ii) : the SuperHyperColoring; 910
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperColoring; 911
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperColoring; 912
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperColoring; 913
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperColoring. 914
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 915
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 916
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 918
(i) : the dual SuperHyperColoring; 919
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperColoring; 920
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperColoring; 921
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperColoring; 922
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperColoring; 923
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperColoring. 924
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 925
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 928
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 929
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 930
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 931
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 935
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 936
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 937
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 940
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 941
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 942
is a 943
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 947
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 948
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 949
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 952
number of 953
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 957
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 958
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 959
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 960
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 961
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 962
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 964
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 965
(iv) : SuperHyperColoring; 969
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 970
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 971
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 972
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 973
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 974
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 975
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 976
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 980
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 982
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 983
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 984
setting of dual 985
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 989
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 990
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 991
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 993
SuperHyperColoring/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 995
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 996
dual 997
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 1001
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 1002
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1003
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1005
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1006
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1007
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1013
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1014
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1015
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1016
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1017
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1018
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1019
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1020
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1021
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1022
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring, then 1023
(i) S is SuperHyperColoring set; 1024
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1025
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1026
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1027
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1028
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1029
connected. Then 1030
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1031
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1032
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1033
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1034
SuperHyperColoring; 1035
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1036
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1037
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1038
a dual SuperHyperColoring. 1039
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1040
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 1041
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1042
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1043
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1044
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1045
dual SuperHyperColoring. 1046
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperColoring. Then 1047
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1048
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1050
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1051
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1052
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1053
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperColoring. Then 1055
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1056
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1058
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1059
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1060
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1062
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperColoring; 1063
(ii) Γ = 1; 1064
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1065
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperColoring. 1066
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1067
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1068
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 1069
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1070
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1071
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1072
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1073
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1074
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1075
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1077
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1078
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1079
SuperHyperColoring. 1080
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1081
bnc
2
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1084
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} bnc

2
; 1085
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1086
SuperHyperColoring. 1087
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1088
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1089
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1090
SuperHyperColoring for N SHF; 1091
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1092
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1093
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1094
SuperHyperColoring for N SHF : (V, E). 1095
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1096
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1097
SuperHyperSet. Then 1098
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1099
SuperHyperColoring for N SHF; 1100
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1101
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 1102
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperColoring 1103
for N SHF : (V, E). 1104
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1105
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1106
SuperHyperSet. Then 1107
bnc
2
SuperHyperColoring for N SHF : (V, E); 1109
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1110
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1111
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperColoring for 1112
N SHF : (V, E). 1113
following statements hold; 1115
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1116
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1117
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1119
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring, then S is a dual 1120
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1121
following statements hold; 1123
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1124
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1125
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1127
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring, then S is a dual 1128
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperColoring. 1129
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1130
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1131
hold; 1132
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1133
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 1134
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1135
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1137
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1139
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1140
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1141
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1142
hold; 1143
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1144
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1146
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1148
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1150
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1151
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1153
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1154
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1155
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1157
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1159
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1162
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1164
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1165
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c
+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1166
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1168
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1170
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring; 1171
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1173
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperColoring. 1175
Then following statements hold; 1176
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1177
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1179
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1181
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1184
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperColoring. 1186
Then following statements hold; 1187
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1188
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1190
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1192
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperColoring. 1195
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1196
Recognition 1197
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1198
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease 1199
is considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1200
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1201
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some 1202
Extreme treatments for this Extreme disease. 1203
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1204
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1205
long-term Extreme function. 1206
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme 1207
model [it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the 1208
move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the 1209
cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy 1210
and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this 1211
event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] 1212
to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1213
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1214
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1215
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1216
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a Extreme 1217
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperColoring, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 1218
SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the 1219
Extreme SuperHyperColoring or the Extreme SuperHyperColoring in those 1220
Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1221
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1222
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1223
SuperHyperModel 1224
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1225
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1226
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1227
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1228
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1229
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1230
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1231
the Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 1232
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1233
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1234
SuperHyperModel 1235
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1236
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1237
Figure 29. a Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperBipartite
Figure 30. a Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1238
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1239
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1240
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1241
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1242
is the Extreme SuperHyperColoring. 1243
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1244
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1245
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1246
The SuperHyperColoring and the Extreme SuperHyperColoring are defined on a 1247
real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1248
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1249
recognitions? 1250
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperColoring and 1251
the Extreme SuperHyperColoring? 1252
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1253
compute them? 1254
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1255
SuperHyperColoring and the Extreme SuperHyperColoring? 1256
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperColoring and the Extreme SuperHyperColoring do a 1257
SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on 1258
SuperHyperColoring, are there else? 1259
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1260
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1261
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1262
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1263
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1264
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1265
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1266
highlighted. 1267
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1268
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1269
SuperHyperColoring. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1270
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on the 1271
new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, Extreme 1272
SuperHyperColoring, finds the convenient background to implement some results based 1273
on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme SuperHyperClasses are the cases 1274
of this research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer 1275
to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To 1276
formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperColoring, the new 1277
SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are 1278
gathered in the section on the SuperHyperColoring and the Extreme 1279
SuperHyperColoring. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the 1280
whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines 1281
containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme 1282
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both 1283
bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on 1284
the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the 1285
SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the 1286
moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 1287
and the architecture are formally called “ SuperHyperColoring” in the themes of jargons 1288
and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 1289
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 Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperColoring
3. Extreme SuperHyperColoring 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1290
avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1291
12 ExtremeSuperHyperDuality But As The 1292
Forms 1294
Definition 12.1. (Different ExtremeTypes of ExtremeSuperHyperDuality). 1295
Assume an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 1296
Consider an ExtremeSuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. 1297
Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 1298
(i) Extremee-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1299
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1300
(ii) Extremere-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1301
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1302
(iii) Extremev-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such that 1304
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1305
(iv) Extremerv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1306
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1307
(v) ExtremeSuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperDuality, 1309
Extremere-SuperHyperDuality, Extremev-SuperHyperDuality, and 1310
Extremerv-SuperHyperDuality. 1311
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1312
Consider an ExtremeSuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 1314
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperDuality, 1315
Extremerv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1317
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 1318
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 1319
the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 1320
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1321
(ii) a ExtremeSuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperDuality, 1322
Extremerv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 1324
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extremecardinality of the 1325
ExtremeSuperHyperEdges of an ExtremeSuperHyperSet S of high 1326
Extremecardinality consecutive ExtremeSuperHyperEdges and 1327
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form the ExtremeSuperHyperDuality; 1328
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1329
Extremee-SuperHyperDuality, Extremere-SuperHyperDuality, 1330
Extremev-SuperHyperDuality, and Extremerv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) 1331
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1332
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1337
(iv) a ExtremeSuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1339
for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1342
ExtremeSuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extremecoefficients defined as the 1343
Extremenumber of the maximum Extremecardinality of the 1344
and the Extremepower is corresponded to its Extremecoefficient; 1348
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of 1349
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1356
(vi) a ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of 1357
for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 1360
Extremecardinality of the ExtremeSuperHyperVertices of an 1361
ExtremeSuperHyperSet S of high Extremecardinality consecutive 1362
ExtremeSuperHyperEdges and ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form 1363
the ExtremeSuperHyperDuality; 1364
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1365
of Extremee-SuperHyperDuality, Extremere-SuperHyperDuality, 1366
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1373
(viii) a ExtremeSuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1375
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices of an ExtremeSuperHyperSet S of high 1381
and the Extremepower is corresponded to its Extremecoefficient. 1384
Example 12.3. Assume an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair 1385
S = (V, E) in the mentioned ExtremeFigures in every Extremeitems. 1386
• On the Figure (1), the ExtremeSuperHyperNotion, namely, 1387
ExtremeSuperHyperDuality, is up. The ExtremeAlgorithm is Neutrosophicly 1388
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1389
a loop ExtremeSuperHyperEdge and E4 is an ExtremeSuperHyperEdge. Thus in 1390
the terms of ExtremeSuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1391
ExtremeSuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The ExtremeSuperHyperVertex, V3 is 1392
Extremeisolated means that there’s no ExtremeSuperHyperEdge has it as an 1393
Extremeendpoint. Thus the ExtremeSuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every 1394
given ExtremeSuperHyperDuality. 1395
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty ExtremeSuperHyperEdges but E4 1398
is an ExtremeSuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 1399
ExtremeSuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one ExtremeSuperHyperEdge, namely, 1400
E4 . The ExtremeSuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extremeisolated means that there’s no 1401
ExtremeSuperHyperEdge has it as an Extremeendpoint. Thus the 1402
ExtremeSuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 1403
ExtremeSuperHyperDuality. 1404


C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.

(1 × 1 × 2)z.

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

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



C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
The previous Extremeapproach apply on the upcoming Extremeresults on 1465
ExtremeSuperHyperClasses. 1466
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected ExtremeSuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1467
Then 1468
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality =
|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 3

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1469
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality .
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1470

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1473
Example 12.5. In the Figure (23), the connected ExtremeSuperHyperPath 1475
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The ExtremeSuperHyperSet, in the 1476
ExtremeSuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1477
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected ExtremeSuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1478
Then 1479
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality =
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperDuality

.
Proof. Let 1480
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1481

Example 12.7. In the Figure (24), the connected ExtremeSuperHyperCycle 1486
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained ExtremeSuperHyperSet, in 1487
the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1488
Proposition 12.8. Assume a connected ExtremeSuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1489
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality |z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1490
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .
be a longest path taken a connected ExtremeSuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s a 1491
new way to redefine as 1492

Example 12.9. In the Figure (25), the connected ExtremeSuperHyperStar 1496
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained ExtremeSuperHyperSet, by 1497
the Algorithm in previous Extremeresult, of the ExtremeSuperHyperVertices of the 1498
connected ExtremeSuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the ExtremeSuperHyperModel 1499
(25), is the ExtremeSuperHyperDuality. 1500
Proposition 12.10. Assume a connected ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite 1501
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1502
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperDuality
= {Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
X
=( (min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |)choose|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |)
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
= {ViEXT ERN AL ∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 1503
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 ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1504

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperDuality. Thus the notion of quasi 1508
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1509
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1510
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1511
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite 1512
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1514
solution 1515
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Example 12.11. In the ExtremeFigure (26), the connected 1517
ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extremehighlighted and 1518
Extremefeatured. The obtained ExtremeSuperHyperSet, by the ExtremeAlgorithm in 1519
previous Extremeresult, of the ExtremeSuperHyperVertices of the connected 1520
ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (26), is 1521
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1522
Proposition 12.12. Assume a connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 1523
= {Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 1525
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected 1526
ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1527

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1532
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest path taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 1534
solution 1537
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Example 12.13. In the Figure (27), the connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 1540
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extremefeatured. The obtained 1541
ExtremeSuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extremeresult, of the 1542
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices of the connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 1543
ESHM : (V, E), in the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (27), is the 1544
Proposition 12.14. Assume a connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1546
Then, 1547
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
ExtremeCardinality
|z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1548
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2∗ ,
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |ExtremeCardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 1549

∃!Ez∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
∗
, ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL ∈ Ez∗ ≡
∃!Ez∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
∗
, {ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL } ⊆ Ez∗ .
The unique embedded SuperHyperDuality proposes some longest SuperHyperDuality 1555
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1556
Example 12.15. In the ExtremeFigure (28), the connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 1557
N SHW : (V, E), is Extremehighlighted and featured. The obtained 1558
ExtremeSuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1559
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices of the connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 1560
ESHW : (V, E), in the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (28), is the 1561
13 ExtremeSuperHyperJoin But As The 1563
Forms 1565
Definition 13.1. (Different ExtremeTypes of ExtremeSuperHyperJoin). 1566
(i) Extremee-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 1570
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 1571
(ii) Extremere-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 1572
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 1573
(iii) Extremev-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 1575
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 1576
(iv) Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 1577
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 1578
(v) ExtremeSuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperJoin, 1580
Extremere-SuperHyperJoin, Extremev-SuperHyperJoin, and 1581
Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin. 1582
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 1583
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperJoin, 1586
Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1588
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 1592
(ii) a ExtremeSuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperJoin, 1593
Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 1595
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form the ExtremeSuperHyperJoin; 1599
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1600
Extremee-SuperHyperJoin, Extremere-SuperHyperJoin, 1601
Extremev-SuperHyperJoin, and Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 1602
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1603
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 1608
coefficient; 1609
(iv) a ExtremeSuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1610
ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the ExtremeSuperHyperPolynomial 1613
contains the Extremecoefficients defined as the Extremenumber of the maximum 1614
Extremecardinality of the ExtremeSuperHyperEdges of an ExtremeSuperHyperSet 1615
S of high Extremecardinality consecutive ExtremeSuperHyperEdges and 1616
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperJoin, 1619
Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1621
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1623
in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 1624
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 1625
(vi) a ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperJoin, 1626
Extremerv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 1628
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1633
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1636
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 1641
coefficient; 1642
(viii) a ExtremeSuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1643
ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the ExtremeSuperHyperPolynomial 1646
contains the Extremecoefficients defined as the Extremenumber of the maximum 1647
the ExtremeSuperHyperJoin; and the Extremepower is corresponded to its 1651
Extremecoefficient. 1652
ExtremeSuperHyperJoin, is up. The ExtremeAlgorithm is Neutrosophicly 1656
given ExtremeSuperHyperJoin. 1663
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
ExtremeSuperHyperJoin. 1672


C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperJoin = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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



C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 1736
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperJoin =
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperJoin

.
Proof. Let 1737
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 1741
ExtremeSuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 1745
Then 1747
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .

.
Proof. Let 1748
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 1756
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1758

(25), is the ExtremeSuperHyperJoin. 1768
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-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
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.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 1771
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 1776
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 1777
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1778
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite 1780
solution 1783
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 1790
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 1793
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 1794
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1795

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 1798
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 1799
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1800
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 1805
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
ESHM : (V, E), in the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (27), is the ExtremeSuperHyperJoin. 1812
Then, 1814
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .

.
Proof. Let 1815
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 1816

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 1820
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 1821
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 1822
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1823
ESHW : (V, E), in the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (28), is the ExtremeSuperHyperJoin. 1828
14 ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect But As The 1829
Forms 1831
Definition 14.1. (Different ExtremeTypes of ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect). 1832
(i) Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 1836
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1837
(ii) Extremere-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 1838
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 1839
(iii) Extremev-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 1841
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1842
(iv) Extremerv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 1843
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 1844
(v) ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect, 1846
Extremere-SuperHyperPerfect, Extremev-SuperHyperPerfect, and 1847
Extremerv-SuperHyperPerfect. 1848
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 1849
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect, 1852
Extremerv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1854
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 1858
(ii) a ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect, 1859
Extremerv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 1861
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form the ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect; 1865
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1866
Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect, Extremere-SuperHyperPerfect, 1867
Extremev-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extremerv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) 1868
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1874
(iv) a ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1876
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of 1886
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 1893
(vi) a ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect, 1894
Extremerv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 1896
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1901
of Extremee-SuperHyperPerfect, Extremere-SuperHyperPerfect, 1902
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1909
(viii) a ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1911
ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect, is up. The ExtremeAlgorithm is Neutrosophicly 1924
given ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect. 1931
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect. 1940


C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial 6z 8 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3i+17i=0 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E15 , E16 , E17 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 , V8 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial =
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {E3i+13i=0 , E23 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 5 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3i+13i=0 , V15 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 5 .

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {V1 , Vii610=5,7,8 }.
i=4

3 × 3z 2 .



C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V2 , V7 , V17 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial =
(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E3i+1i=03 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V2i+1i=05 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 6 .



C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2004
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect =
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect

.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2005
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2009
ExtremeSuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2013
Then 2015
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect =
= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect

.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2016
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2024
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2026

(25), is the ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect. 2036
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperPerfect
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2039
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2044
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2045
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite 2048
solution 2051
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2058
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2061
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 2062

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2066
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2067
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2073
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Then, 2083
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2084

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 2085

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2089
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2090
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2091
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2092
15 ExtremeSuperHyperTotal But As The 2099
Forms 2101
Definition 15.1. (Different ExtremeTypes of ExtremeSuperHyperTotal). 2102
(i) Extremee-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2106
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2107
(ii) Extremere-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2108
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2109
(iii) Extremev-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2111
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2112
(iv) Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2113
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2114
(v) ExtremeSuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperTotal, 2116
Extremere-SuperHyperTotal, Extremev-SuperHyperTotal, and 2117
Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal. 2118
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2119
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperTotal, 2122
Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2124
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2128
(ii) a ExtremeSuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperTotal, 2129
Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 2131
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form the ExtremeSuperHyperTotal; 2135
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2136
Extremee-SuperHyperTotal, Extremere-SuperHyperTotal, 2137
Extremev-SuperHyperTotal, and Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for 2138
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2139
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2144
coefficient; 2145
(iv) a ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2146
an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 2149
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperTotal, 2156
Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2158
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2160
in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2161
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2162
(vi) a ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extremee-SuperHyperTotal, 2163
Extremerv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph 2165
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2170
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2173
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2178
coefficient; 2179
(viii) a ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2180
an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 2183
ExtremeSuperHyperTotal, is up. The ExtremeAlgorithm is Neutrosophicly 2193
given ExtremeSuperHyperTotal. 2200
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
ExtremeSuperHyperTotal. 2209


C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi- = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal = {Ei+19i=0 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+19i=0 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {E12 , E13 , E14 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {V12 , V13 , V14 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 10z 10 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+19i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E5 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {E1 , E6 , E7 , E8 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 4 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V5 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {E1 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , Vii68=4,5,6 }.
i=1




4 × 3z 3 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V2 , V6 , V17 }.
4 × 3z 4 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V2 , V6 , V17 }.
2 × 4 × 3z 4 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 11z 10 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+2i=011 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 11z 10 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= |(|V | − 1)z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal = {E1 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2273
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal =
|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality .
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −2
Proof. Let 2274
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2278
ExtremeSuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2282
Then 2284
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal =
|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −2
Proof. Let 2285
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −1

the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2293
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2295
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the ExtremeSuperHyperTotal. 2305
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal
= {Ea ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) ,
i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
= {VaEXT ERN AL ∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vb
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2308
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2313
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2314
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite 2317
solution 2320
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2327
i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vb
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2330
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite 2331

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2335
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2336
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2342
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Then, 2352
∗
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|ExtremeCardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2353
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 2354

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2358
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2359
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2360
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2361
16 ExtremeSuperHyperConnected But As The 2368
Forms 2370
Definition 16.1. (Different ExtremeTypes of ExtremeSuperHyperConnected). 2371
(i) Extremee-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2375
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2376
(ii) Extremere-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2377
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2378
(iii) Extremev-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2380
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2381
(iv) Extremerv-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2382
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2383
(v) ExtremeSuperHyperConnected if it’s either of 2385
Extremee-SuperHyperConnected, Extremere-SuperHyperConnected, 2386
Extremev-SuperHyperConnected, and Extremerv-SuperHyperConnected. 2387
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2388
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of 2391
Extremev-SuperHyperConnected, and Extremerv-SuperHyperConnected and 2393
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2394
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2395
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2396
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2398
(ii) a ExtremeSuperHyperConnected if it’s either of 2399
C(N SHG) for a ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2402
Extremecardinality of the ExtremeSuperHyperEdges of an 2403
the ExtremeSuperHyperConnected; 2406
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2407
of Extremee-SuperHyperConnected, Extremere-SuperHyperConnected, 2408
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2410
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2415
(iv) a ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2417
C(N SHG) for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 2420
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form the 2425
ExtremeSuperHyperConnected; and the Extremepower is corresponded to its 2426
Extremecoefficient; 2427
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of 2428
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2431
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2432
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 2433
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 2434
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2435
(vi) a ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of 2436
C(N SHG) for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2439
the ExtremeSuperHyperConnected; 2443
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2444
either of Extremee-SuperHyperConnected, Extremere-SuperHyperConnected, 2445
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2447
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2452
(viii) a ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2454
C(N SHG) for an ExtremeSuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 2457
ExtremeSuperHyperVertices such that they form the 2462
ExtremeSuperHyperConnected; and the Extremepower is corresponded to its 2463
Extremecoefficient. 2464
ExtremeSuperHyperConnected, is up. The ExtremeAlgorithm is Neutrosophicly 2468
given ExtremeSuperHyperConnected. 2475
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
ExtremeSuperHyperConnected. 2484


C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected = {E1 , E2 , E4 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Ei+19i=0 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+19i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E12 , E13 , E14 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V12 , V13 , V14 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial =
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 10z 10 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+119
i=11
, V22 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E5 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {E1 , E6 , E7 , E8 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 4 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V5 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E1 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 5z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , Vii68=4,5,6 }.
i=1
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 5 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {E3 , E9 , E6 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V5 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V2 , V3 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E2 , E3 , E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
4 × 3z 3 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V2 , V6 , V17 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial =
4 × 3z 4 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V2 , V6 , V17 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial =
2 × 4 × 3z 4 .

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 11z 10 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+2i=011 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 10z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {E3 , E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2548
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected =
|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
= z ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality z ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2549
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 2553
ExtremeSuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2557
Then 2559
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected =
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality − 1)
z .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality z ESHG:(V,E) ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2560
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality −1 .

the ExtremeSuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2568
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2570
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the ExtremeSuperHyperConnected. 2580
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected
i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)ExtremeV-SuperHyperConnected
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vb
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)ExtremeV-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2583
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2588
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2589
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected 2592
ExtremeSuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and 2593
only minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 2594
solution 2595
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2602
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi-SuperHyperConnected
i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)ExtremeV-SuperHyperConnected
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vb
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)ExtremeV-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
ExtremeCardinality
Proof. Let 2605
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected 2606
ExtremeSuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2607

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2610
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2611
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2617
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Then, 2627
∗
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeSuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |ExtremeCardinality |z.
C(N SHG)ExtremeV-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeV-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2628
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected ExtremeSuperHyperWheel 2629

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2633
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2634
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 2635
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 2636
17 Background 2644
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 2645
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them date back on February 19, 2646
2023. 2647
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 2648
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step toward the 2649
research on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article is published on the 2650
journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and the pages 531-561. In this 2651
research article, different types of notions like dominating, resolving, coloring, 2652
Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, 2653
zero forcing number, zero forcing neutrosophic- number, independent number, 2654
independent neutrosophic-number, clique number, clique neutrosophic-number, 2655
matching number, matching neutrosophic-number, girth, neutrosophic girth, 2656
1-zero-forcing number, 1-zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, failed 1-zero-forcing 2657
number, failed 1-zero-forcing neutrosophic-number, global- offensive alliance, t-offensive 2658
alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, and global-powerful alliance are defined 2659
in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of 2660
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are cases of research. Some 2661
results are applied in family of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 2662
Thus this research article has concentrated on the vast notions and introducing the 2663
majority of notions. 2664
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 2665
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 2666
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 2667
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 2668
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 2669
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 2670
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 2671
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 2672
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 2673
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 2674
results based on initial background. 2675
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 2676
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 2677
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 2678
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 2679
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 2680
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 2681
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 2682
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 2683
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 2684
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 2685
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 2686
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 2687
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 2688
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 2689
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [52] by Henry Garrett 2690
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 2691
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 2692
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 2693
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 2694
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 2695
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 2696
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 2697
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 2698
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 2699
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 2700
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 2701
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 2702
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 2703
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 2704
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 2705
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 2706
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 2707
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 2708
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2709
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 2710
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 2711
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 2712
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by 2713
Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 2714
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s 2715
Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry 2716
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 2717
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic 2718
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked 2719
Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled 2720
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2721
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 2722
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 2724
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by 2725
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 2726
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 2727
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2728
“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 2729
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry 2730
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 2731
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 2732
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 2733
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 2734
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2735
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 2736
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 2737
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 2738
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 2739
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 2740
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 2741
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 2742
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by 2743
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2744
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by 2745
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 2746
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 2747
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 2748
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 2749
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 2750
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 2751
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [66] by Henry 2752
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 2753
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching 2754
Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [67] by Henry 2755
Garrett (2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 2756
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 2757
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [68] by Henry 2758
Garrett (2023), “Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of 2759
Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s 2760
Recognition called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [69] by Henry Garrett 2761
(2023), “Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 2762
Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 2763
Ref. [72] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every 2764
Embedded Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 2765
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in 2766
Ref. [73] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2767
Regions titled neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 2768
Recognition modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [76] by 2769
Henry Garrett (2023), “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 2770
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 2771
Ref. [79] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 2772
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 2773
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [80] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) 2774
SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled 2775
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 2777
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 2778
in Ref. [82] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in 2779
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [83] by Henry 2780
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2781
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 2782
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [84] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions 2783
Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 2784
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [95] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of 2785
Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on 2786
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in 2787
Ref. [96] by Henry Garrett (2022), there are some endeavors to formalize the basic 2788
SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 2789
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 2790
proposed as book in Ref. [97] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 2791
Scholar and has more than 3230 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 2792
Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st 2793
Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research book covers different 2794
types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 2795
SuperHyperGraph theory. 2796
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 2797
proposed as book in Ref. [98] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 2798
Scholar and has more than 4117 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 2799
and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell 2800
Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This research book presents different 2801
types of notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of 2802
duality in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This 2803
research book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 2804
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 2805
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 2806
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 2807
framework of Extreme SuperHyperDominating, Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating 2808
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [5–96]. Two popular scientific 2809
research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 3230 and 4117 respectively, on 2810
neutrosophic science is on [97, 98]. 2811
– 2812
References 2813
1. Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2814
SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 2815
10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 2816
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf). 2817
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss journal/vol49/iss1/34). 2818
2. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 2819
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 2820
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 2821
3. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 2822
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 2823
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 2824
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 2825
4. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 2826
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 2827
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 2828
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 2829
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 2830
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 2831
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 2832
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 2833
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 2834
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 2835
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 2836
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 2837
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 2838
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 2839
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 2840
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 2841
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 2842
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 2843
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 2844
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 2845
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 2846
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 2847
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 2848
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2849
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 2850
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 2851
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2852
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 2853
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 2854
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 2855
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 2856
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 2857
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 2858
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 2859
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 2860
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 2861
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2862
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 2863
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 2864
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 2865
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 2866
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 2867
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 2868
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 2869
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 2870
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 2871
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 2872
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2873
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 2874
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 2875
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 2876
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 2877
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 2878
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 2879
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 2881
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 2882
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2883
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 2884
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2885
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 2886
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 2888
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 2892
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 2893
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 2894
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 2895
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 2896
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 2897
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 2898
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2899
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 2900
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2901
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 2902
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 2903
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 2904
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 2905
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 2906
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 2907
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 2908
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 2909
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 2910
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 2911
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 2912
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 2913
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13397.09446). 2914
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 2915
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 2916
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 2917
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 2918
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 2919
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 2922
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11758.69441). 2923
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 2924
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 2925
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super 2928
Infections”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19360.87048). 2929
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 2930
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 2931
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 2933
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 2934
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super 2937
Vacancy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19911.37285). 2938
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 2940
35. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 2942
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 2943
36. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 2945
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 2946
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 2948
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 2949
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 2950
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 2951
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 2952
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 2953
39. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 2954
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 2955
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 2957
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 2958
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 2959
41. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 2960
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 2961
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 2962
42. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 2963
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 2964
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2965
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 2966
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2969
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 2970
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2973
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 2974
45. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 2975
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2977
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 2978
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2981
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 2982
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2985
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 2986
48. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 2987
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 2988
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 2989
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 2990
49. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 2991
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 2992
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 2993
50. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 2994
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 2995
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 2996
51. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 2997
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper 2998
Extensions of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 2999
52. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3000
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3001
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3002
(2023) 35-47. 3003
53. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3004
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3005
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3006
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3007
54. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3008
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3009
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3010
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3011
55. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3012
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3013
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3014
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, 3015
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3016
56. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3017
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3018
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3019
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3020
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3021
57. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3022
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3023
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3024
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3025
58. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3026
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3027
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3028
59. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3029
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3030
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3032
60. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3033
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3034
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3035
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3036
61. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3037
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3038
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3039
62. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3040
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3041
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3042
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3043
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3044
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3045
63. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3046
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3047
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3048
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3049
64. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3050
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3051
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3052
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3053
65. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3054
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3055
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3056
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3057
66. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3058
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3059
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3060
67. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3061
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3062
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3063
68. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3065
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3067
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3068
69. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3069
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3070
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3071
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3072
70. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3073
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3075
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3076
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3078
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3079
72. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3080
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3081
73. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3083
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3084
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3085
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3090
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3094
76. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3095
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3096
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3097
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3098
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3101
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3103
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3104
79. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3105
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3106
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3109
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3110
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3112
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3113
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3116
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3117
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3119
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3120
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3123
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3124
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3126
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3127
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3129
87. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3131
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3134
88. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3136
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3139
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3146
91. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3147
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3148
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3149
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3150
92. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3151
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3152
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3153
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3154
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3157
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3158
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3161
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3162
95. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3163
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3164
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3165
96. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3166
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3167
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3168
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3169
97. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing: 3170
Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 3171
United States. ISBN: 979-1-59973-725-6 3172
(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf). 3173
98. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL 3174
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 3175
33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 3176
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf). 3177
View publication stats

New Ideas On Super Relations by Hyper Identifications of SuperHyperColoring in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

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 On Super Relations by Hyper Identifications of SuperHyperColoring in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identiﬁcations Of SuperHyperColoring

Preprint · February 2023

327 PUBLICATIONS 4,118 CITATIONS

On Fuzzy Logic View project

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 2

SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With 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

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

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

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

e-SuperHyperColoring if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); Neutrosophic 13

re-SuperHyperColoring if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); and 14

|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 15

v-SuperHyperColoring if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); 16

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that 17

d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 18

Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, 19

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and 20

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperColoring). Assume a 21

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a 22

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 23

Extreme SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, 24

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and 25

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 26

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 27

of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive 28

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 29

that they form the Extreme SuperHyperColoring; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring 30

if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic 31

re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic 32

rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 33

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 34

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 35

consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 36

that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring; an Extreme SuperHyperColoring 37

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, 38

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and 39

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 40

N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 41

Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 43

consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 44

Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperColoring SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 46

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 47

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and 48

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 49

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 50

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 51

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 52

consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 53

corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperColoring if it’s 55

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 56

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and 57

cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 59

SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 60

and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 61

SuperHyperColoring; a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperColoring if it’s either of 62

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperColoring, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperColoring, 63

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperColoring, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperColoring and 64