New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super Landmarks

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/368717242
New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super Landmarks
Preprint · February 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
329 PUBLICATIONS 4,192 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Fuzzy Logic View project
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 23 February 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA
New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 2
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper 3
Enumerations On Super Landmarks 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
SuperHyperOrder). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 10
pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 11
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder 12
if Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder if 13
Vc ∈ Ea , Eb ∈ E 0 such that d(Ea ) 6= d(Eb ); and 14
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 15
v-SuperHyperOrder if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); Neutrosophic 16
rv-SuperHyperOrder if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); and 17
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 18
SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 19
re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic 20
rv-SuperHyperOrder. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperOrder). Assume a Neutrosophic 21
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 23
SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 24
re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 26
is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 27
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 28
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 29
Extreme SuperHyperOrder; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of 30
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 31
v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for a 32
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 33
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 34
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 35
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperOrder; an Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 37
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 38
v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for an 39
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 40
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 41
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 42
of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 43
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperOrder; and the 44
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 45
SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 46
e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 47
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 SuperHyperOrder; and the Neutrosophic power is 54
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder if it’s 55
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, 56
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder and 57
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 SuperHyperOrder; a 61
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, 62
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic 63
rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 64
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 65
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 66
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 67
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder; an 68
Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 69
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 72
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet 74
S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 75
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperOrder; and the 76
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 77
SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 78
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 83
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 84
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 85
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder; and the 86
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific 87
research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 88
SuperHyperOrder and Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. Two different types of 89
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 90
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 91
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 92
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 93
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 94
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 95
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 96
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 97
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 98
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 99
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 100
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 101
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−SuperHyperOrder 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−SuperHyperOrder 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 SuperHyperOrder . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 122
SuperHyperOrder more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 123
SuperHyperOrder, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperOrder ”. 124
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 125
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 126
assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperOrder . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 127
SuperHyperOrder 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 SuperHyperOrder . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation 136
of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all 137
SuperHyperOrder until the SuperHyperOrder, then it’s officially called a 138
“SuperHyperOrder” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperOrder . There are some 139
instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperOrder ”. 140
These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 141
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperOrder . For the 142
sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion 143
of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder” and a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder ”. The 144
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 145
assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 147
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperOrder 148
are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder” if the intended Table holds. It’s 149
useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways 150
to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder more 151
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 152
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 153
SuperHyperOrder, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, 154
and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 155
SuperHyperOrder”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic 156
SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic 157
SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a 158
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder” where it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic 159
value from all the SuperHyperOrder amid the maximum value amid all 160
SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperOrder .] SuperHyperOrder . A graph is a 161
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 162
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 163
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 164
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 165
SuperHyperOrder if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 166
SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 167
all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 168
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, 169
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one 170
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 171
forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 172
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 173
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 174
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 175
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 176
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 177
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 178
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 179
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 180
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 181
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 182
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 183
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 184
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 185
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 186
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 187
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 188
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 189
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 190
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 191
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 192
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 193
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperOrder, 194
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 195
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperOrder or the strongest 196
SuperHyperOrder in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 197
SuperHyperOrder, called SuperHyperOrder, and the strongest SuperHyperOrder, called 198
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 199
SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s 200
not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style 201
of a SuperHyperOrder. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperOrder but 202
literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperOrder. It, literarily, deforms and it 203
doesn’t form. A basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder theory, 204
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 205
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperOrder, Cancer’s 206
Neutrosophic Recognition 207
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 208
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 209
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 210
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 211
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 212
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 213
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 214
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 215
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 216
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 217
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 218
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 219
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 220
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 221
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 222
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 223
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 224
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 225
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 226
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 227
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 228
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 229
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 230
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 231
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 232
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 233
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 234
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 235
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 236
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 237
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 238
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 239
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 240
formally called “ SuperHyperOrder” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 241
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 242
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 243
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 244
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 245
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 246
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 247
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 248
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 249
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 250
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 251
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 252
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperOrder, SuperHyperStar, 253
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 254
either the optimal SuperHyperOrder or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in those 255
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 256
SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two 257
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 258
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperOrder. There isn’t any formation of 259
any SuperHyperOrder but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperOrder. It, 260
literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 261
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 262
find the “ amount of SuperHyperOrder” of either individual of cells or the groups of 263
cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 264
SuperHyperOrder” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of cells? 265
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 266
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 267
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 268
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 269
SuperHyperOrder” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder” on “SuperHyperGraph” and 270
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more motivations to 271
define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this SuperHyperNotion 272
with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some instances and examples to 273
make clarifications about the framework of this research. The general results and some 274
results about some connections are some avenues to make key point of this research, 275
“Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 276
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 277
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 278
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 279
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 280
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 281
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 282
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperOrder and 283
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperOrder” and 284
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in 285
order to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and 286
Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, 287
corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, 288
titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 289
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 290
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 291
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 292
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 293
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 294
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 295
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 296
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 297
SuperHyperOrder”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” 298
and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about 299
what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this 300
research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for 301
this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperOrder”. The keyword of this research 302
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 303
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 304
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 305
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 306
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 307
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 308
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 309
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 310
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 311
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 312
Research On the Redeemed Ways 313
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 314
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [96],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [96],Definition 315
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [96],Definition 2.5,p.2), 316
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [96],Definition 317
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [96], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 318
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [96],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 319
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [96],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 320
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 321
(Ref. [96],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 322
to Ref. [96]. 323
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 324
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 325
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [96],Definition 2.1,p.1). 326
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 327
+
]− 0, 1 [. 328
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [96],Definition 2.2,p.2). 329
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 330
2.5,p.2). 331
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 332
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 333
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 334
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 335
1, 2, . . . , n); 336
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 337
V; 338
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 339
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 340
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 341
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 342
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 343
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 344
(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 . 345
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 346
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 347
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 348
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 349
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 350
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 351
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 352
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 353
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 354
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 355
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 356
(Ref. [96],Definition 2.7,p.3). 357
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair S = (V, E). 358
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 359
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 360
could be characterized as follow-up items. 361
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 362
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 363
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 364
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 365
HyperEdge; 366
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 367
SuperEdge; 368
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 369
SuperHyperEdge. 370
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 371
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 372
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [96], Definition 2.7, p.3). 373
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 374
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 375
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 376
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 377
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 378
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 379
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)). 380
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an 381
ordered pair S = (V, E), where 382
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 383
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 384
1, 2, . . . , n); 385
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 386
V; 387
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 388
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 389
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 390
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 391
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 392
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 393
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 394
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 395
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 396
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 397
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 398
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 399
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 400
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 401
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 402
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 403
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 404
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic 407
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) 408
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 410
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 411
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 412
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 413
HyperEdge; 414
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 415
SuperEdge; 416
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 417
SuperHyperEdge. 418
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 419
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 420
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 421
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 422
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 423
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 424
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 425
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 426
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 427
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 428
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 429
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 430
given SuperHyperEdges; 431
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 432
SuperHyperEdges; 433
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 434
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 435
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 436
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 437
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 438
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 439
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 440
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 441
common SuperVertex. 442
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 443
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 444
of following conditions hold: 445
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 446
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 447
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 448
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 449
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 450
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 451
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 452
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 453
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 454
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 455
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 456
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; 458
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 459
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 460
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 461
SuperHyperPath . 462
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 463
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 465
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 466
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 467
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 468
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 469
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 470
(NSHE)). (Ref. [96],Definition 5.4,p.7). 471
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is 473
called 474
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 475
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 476
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 477
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 478
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 479
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 481
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 482
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 484
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 485
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 486
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 487
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder). 488
Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 490
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 491
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder if N (E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez ) = N (E 0 ) = EN SHG ; 492
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder if 493
N (E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez ) = N (E 0 ) = EN SHG ; and 494
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 495
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder if N (V1 , V2 , . . . , Vz ) = N (V 0 ) = VN SHG ; 496
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder if N (V1 , V2 , . . . , Vz ) = N (V 0 ) = VN SHG ; 497
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 498
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic 499
v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder. 501
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperOrder). 502
called 505
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic 506
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 509
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 510
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 511
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 512
Extreme SuperHyperOrder; 513
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic 514
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 518
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 519
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 520
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder; 521
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 522
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, 523
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 525
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 526
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 527
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 528
Extreme SuperHyperOrder; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 530
Extreme coefficient; 531
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 532
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, 533
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 535
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 536
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 537
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 538
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 539
SuperHyperOrder; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 541
Neutrosophic coefficient; 542
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic 543
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 548
Extreme SuperHyperOrder; 550
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic 551
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 555
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder; 558
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 559
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, 560
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 564
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 565
Extreme SuperHyperOrder; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 567
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 569
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, 570
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 575
SuperHyperOrder; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 578
Neutrosophic coefficient. 579
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperOrder). 580
Then 582
(i) an δ−SuperHyperOrder is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 583
SuperHyperOrder such that either of the following expressions hold for the 584
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 585
|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 586
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 587
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOrder is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 588
SuperHyperOrder such that either of the following Neutrosophic expressions hold 589
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 590
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ.
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)
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. 591
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 592
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 593
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, there’s a need to 594
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 595
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 596
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 597
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 598
pair S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) 599
holds. 600
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 601
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 602
understandable. 603
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 604
pair S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 605
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperOrder, SuperHyperStar, 606
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 607
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 608
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 609
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 610
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 611
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. 612
Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder 613
more Neutrosophicly understandable. 614
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, there’s a need to 615
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder”. The 616
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 617
assign to the values. 619
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperOrder. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 620
SuperHyperOrder if the Table (3) holds. 621

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder But As The 622
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 623
Forms 624
Example 4.1. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered pair 625
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 626
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 627
SuperHyperOrder, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 628
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 629
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 630
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 631
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 632
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 633
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 634
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 635
SuperHyperOrder. 636
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {Ei }i6=2 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder = {Vi }i6=1,2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 2 .
637
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 640
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 641
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 642
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 643
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 644
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 645
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {Ei }4i=1 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = z 4 .
647
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)


straightforward. 650
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {Ei }4i=1 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
651
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {Ei }i6=2,4,5 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder = {V3 , O}.
655
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {E2 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder = {V5 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
659



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder

= {E3i+1 , E3j+23 }3i,j=0 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 3z 8 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder
= {V3i+1 , V3j+11 }3i,j=0 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Quasi-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 3z 8 .
663
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder =

{E15 , E16 , E17 }.
= 6 × 5 × 3z 3 .
{V1 , V4 , V8 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 5 × 5 × 4z 3 .

667

{E4 }.
= z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder =
{V1 , V4 , V8 }.
= 5 × 5 × 4z 3 .
671

= {E3i+1 , E23 }3i=0 .
= 3 × 11z 5 .
= {V3i+1 , V11 }3i=0 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Quasi-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 11z 5 .

675

{E5 }.
= z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder =
{V1 , V4 , V8 }.
= 5 × 5 × 4z 3 .
679

{Ei }i=2,3,4,5,7,8 .
= 3 × 3z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder = {Vi }i6=2,3,5 .
= 3 × 3z 3 .
683

Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder = {E1 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder
= {Vi }i6=4,6,9,10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial =
= 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 2z 5 .
687

{Ei }i=2,4,5,7,8 .
= z3.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder = {Vi }i6=2,3,4,6 .
= 3 × 3z 2 .
691




C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder = {V1 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
695
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder = {E1 , E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = z 2 .
699


C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder = {V2 , V17 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
703

= {V2 , V7 , V17 , V27 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 8 × 5 × 2z 4 .
707

= {V2 , V7 , V17 , V27 }.
= 8 × 5 × 2z 4 .



C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder

= {E3i+1 i=03 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 4 .
= {V3i+1 i=03 }.
= 3z 4 .
714

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperOrder = {V1 }.
= z.
718



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {E2 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder = {V1 }.
= 10z.
722

= {V3 , V6 }.
= 5z 2 .

726
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 727
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 728
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 729
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 730
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 731
Then 732

= {E3i+1 |EN SHG | }.
i=0 3

|EN SHG |
= 3z 3 .
EXT ERN AL
= {V3i+1 |EN SHG | }.
i=0 3

|EN SHG |
= 3z 3 .
Proof. Let 733
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperOrder in the Example (16.5)
734
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 735
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 736
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 737
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperOrder. The latter is 738
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 740
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 741
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperOrder. 742
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 743
Then 744

|EN SHG |
= {E3i+1 i=0 3 }.
|EN SHG |
= 3z 3 .
EXT ERN AL
= {V3i+1 |EN SHG | }.
i=0 3

|EN SHG |
= 3z 3 .
Proof. Let 745
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
746
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 747
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 748

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 752
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 753
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 754
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 756
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

Then 757
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {Ei }.

= |EN SHG |z.
= {CEN T ER}.
= z.
Proof. Let 758
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
759
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 760
There’s a new way to redefine as 761

Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 765
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 766
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 767
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 768
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. 769
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 770
ESHB : (V, E). Then 771

= {EiEi ∈Pi ||Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | }.
= (|{Pi | |Pi | = min |Pj |}|)z |Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
Pj ∈EN SHG

= {ViVi ∈Pi ||Pi |=minPj ∈VN SHG |Pj | }.
Pj ∈EN SHG
Proof. Let 772
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
773
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 774
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 775

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperOrder. Thus the notion of 778
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperOrder could be 779
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 780
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 781
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperOrder taken from a connected Neutrosophic 782
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 783
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 784
solution 785
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 786
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 787
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 788
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 789
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 790
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 791
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. 792
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 793
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in the Example (16.11)
ESHM : (V, E). Then 794

= {EiEi ∈Pi ||Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | }.
Pj ∈EN SHG

= {ViVi ∈Pi ||Pi |=minPj ∈VN SHG |Pj | }.
Pj ∈EN SHG
Proof. Let 795
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
796
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest SuperHyperOrder taken from a connected Neutrosophic 797
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 798

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperOrder. Thus the notion of 801
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperOrder could be 802
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 803
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 805
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 806
solution 808
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 810
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 811
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 812
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 813
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 814
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 815
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. 816
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 817
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 818
∗
|EN SHG |
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder = {Ei∗ }i=1 .
∗
= z |EN SHG | .
= {CEN T ER}.
= z.
Proof. Let 819
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in the Example (16.13)
820
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
is a longest SuperHyperOrder taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 821
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 822

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperOrder. Thus the notion of quasi 825
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperOrder could be applied. The 826
unique embedded SuperHyperOrder proposes some longest SuperHyperOrder excerpt 827
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 828
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 830
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 831
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 832
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 833
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 835
Results But As The Initial Motivation 836
For the SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, and the Neutrosophic 837
SuperHyperOrder, some general results are introduced. 838
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.15)
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder is “redefined” on the 839
positions of the alphabets. 840
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. Then 841
N eutrosophic SuperHyperOrder =
{theSuperHyperOrderof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperOrder
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperOrder. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 842
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 843
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 844
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 845
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder and 846
SuperHyperOrder coincide. 847
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 849
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder if and only if it’s a SuperHyperOrder. 850
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 852
SuperHyperOrder if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperOrder. 853
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 854
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder is its 855
SuperHyperOrder and reversely. 856
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperOrder, 857
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 858
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder is its 859
SuperHyperOrder and reversely. 860
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 861
SuperHyperOrder isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperOrder isn’t well-defined. 862
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 863
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperOrder 864
isn’t well-defined. 865
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder isn’t well-defined if and only if its 868
SuperHyperOrder isn’t well-defined. 869
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 870
SuperHyperOrder is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperOrder is well-defined. 871
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 872
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder is well-defined if and only if its 873
SuperHyperOrder is well-defined. 874
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder is well-defined if and only if its 877
SuperHyperOrder is well-defined. 878
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 879
is 880
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 881
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 882
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 883
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 884
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 885
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 886
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 887
∅ is 888
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 889
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 890
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 891
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 892
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 893
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 894
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 895
independent SuperHyperSet is 896
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 897
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 898
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 899
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 900
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 901
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 902
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 903
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperOrder/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a maximal 904
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 905
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 906
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 907
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 908
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 909
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 910
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 911
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 912
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 913
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 914
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 915
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 916
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 917
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 918
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 919
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 920
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperOrder/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 922
(i) : the SuperHyperOrder; 923
(ii) : the SuperHyperOrder; 924
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperOrder; 925
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperOrder; 926
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperOrder; 927
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperOrder. 928
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 929
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 930
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 932
(i) : the dual SuperHyperOrder; 933
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperOrder; 934
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperOrder; 935
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperOrder; 936
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperOrder; 937
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperOrder. 938
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 939
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 942
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 943
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 944
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 945
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 949
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 950
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 951
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 954
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 955
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 956
is a 957
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 961
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 962
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 963
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 966
number of 967
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 971
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 972
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 973
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 974
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 975
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 976
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 978
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 979
(iv) : SuperHyperOrder; 983
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 984
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 985
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 986
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 987
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 988
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 989
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 990
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 994
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 996
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 998
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 999
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1003
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1004
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1005
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1007
SuperHyperOrder/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1009
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1010
of a dual 1011
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1015
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1016
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1017
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1019
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1020
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1021
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1027
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1028
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1029
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1030
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1031
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1032
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1033
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1034
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1035
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1036
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1037
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder, then 1038
(i) S is SuperHyperOrder set; 1039
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1040
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1041
Then 1042
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1043
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1044
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1045
which is connected. Then 1046
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1047
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1048
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1049
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1050
SuperHyperOrder; 1051
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1052
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1053
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1054
a dual SuperHyperOrder. 1055
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1056
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1057
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1058
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1059
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1060
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1061
dual SuperHyperOrder. 1062
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperOrder. Then 1063
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1064
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1066
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1067
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1068
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1069
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperOrder. Then 1071
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1072
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1074
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1075
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1076
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1078
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperOrder; 1079
(ii) Γ = 1; 1080
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1081
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperOrder. 1082
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1083
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1084
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1085
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1086
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1087
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1088
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1089
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1090
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1091
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1093
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1094
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1095
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1097
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1098
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1099

bnc ; 1100
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1101
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1103
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1104
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1105
SuperHyperOrder for N SHF; 1106
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1107
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1108
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1109
SuperHyperOrder for N SHF : (V, E). 1110
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1111
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1112
SuperHyperSet. Then 1113
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1114
SuperHyperOrder for N SHF; 1115
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1116

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1117
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperOrder for 1118
N SHF : (V, E). 1119
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1120
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1121
SuperHyperSet. Then 1122
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder 1123
for N SHF : (V, E); 1124
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1125

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1126
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperOrder for 1127
N SHF : (V, E). 1128
Then following statements hold; 1130
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1131
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1132
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1134
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperDefensive 1135
Then following statements hold; 1138
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1139
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1140
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1142
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperPowerful 1143
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1145
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1146
statements hold; 1147
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1148
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1149
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1150
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1152
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1154
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1155
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1156
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1157
statements hold; 1158
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1159
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1161
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1163
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1165
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1166
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1168
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1169
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1170
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1172
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1174
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1177
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1179
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1180
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1181
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1183
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1185
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder; 1186
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1188
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1190
SuperHyperOrder. Then following statements hold; 1191
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1192
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1194
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1196
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1199
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1201
SuperHyperOrder. Then following statements hold; 1202
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1203
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1205
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1207
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperOrder. 1210
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1211
Neutrosophic Recognition 1212
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1213
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1214
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1215
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1216
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1217
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1218
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1219
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1220
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1221
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1222
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1223
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1224
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1225
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1226
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1227
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1228
happened and what’s done. 1229
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1230
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1231
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1232
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1233
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperOrder, SuperHyperStar, 1234
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1235
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder or the Neutrosophic 1236
SuperHyperOrder in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1237
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1238
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1239
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1240
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1241
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1242
featured. 1243
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1244
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1245
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1246
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1247
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the 1248
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (29), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. 1249
Figure 30. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1250
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1251
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1252
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1253
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1254
Neutrosophic featured. 1255
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1256
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1257
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1258
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1259
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1260
SuperHyperModel (30), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. 1261
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1262
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1263
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1264
The SuperHyperOrder and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder are defined on a 1265
real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1266
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1267
recognitions? 1268
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperOrder and 1269
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder? 1270
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1271
compute them? 1272
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1273
SuperHyperOrder and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder? 1274
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperOrder and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder do a 1275
SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on SuperHyperOrder, 1276
are there else? 1277
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1278
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1279
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1280
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1281
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1282
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1283
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1284
highlighted. 1285
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1286
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1287
SuperHyperOrder. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1288
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1289
the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1290
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder, finds the convenient background to implement some 1291
results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic 1292
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1293
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1294
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1295
SuperHyperOrder, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. 1296
Some general results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperOrder and the 1297
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have 1298
taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the 1299
lines containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1300
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both 1301
bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on 1302
the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the 1303
SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the 1304
moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 1305
and the architecture are formally called “ SuperHyperOrder” in the themes of jargons 1306
and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 1307
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and 1308
avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1309
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperOrder
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1310
Forms 1312
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1313
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1317
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1318
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1319
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1320
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1322
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1323
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1324
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1325
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1326
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1327
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1328
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1329
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1330
called 1333
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1334
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1336
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1337
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1338
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1339
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1341
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1342
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1345
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1349
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1350
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1351
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1352
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1358
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1360
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1361
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1369
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1371
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1376
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1378
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1379
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1386
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1387
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1395
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1397
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1406
Example 12.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is an ordered 1408
pair S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 1409
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1411
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1412
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1413
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1414
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1415
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1416
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1417
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1418
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
SuperHyperDuality. 1427


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+1i=03 }.

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



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1490
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1491
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1492
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1496
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1500
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1501
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1502
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality

.
Proof. Let 1503
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1514
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1515
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1525
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 1528
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

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperDuality. Thus the notion of quasi 1533
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1534
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1535
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1536
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1537
solution 1540
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1547

= {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 |
Proof. Let 1550
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1551

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1557
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 1562
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1570
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
|z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1573
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Neutrosophic Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1574

∃!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 1580
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1581
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 1588
Forms 1590
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 1591
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 1595
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 1596
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 1597
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 1598
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 1600
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 1601
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 1602
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 1603
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1605
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 1606
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 1607
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 1608
called 1611
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 1612
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 1613
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 1614
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 1615
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1616
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 1619
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1620
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 1622
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 1627
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1628
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 1629
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 1630
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1631
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 1636
coefficient; 1637
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1638
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 1643
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1644
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 1647
coefficient; 1648
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1649
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 1656
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1657
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 1664
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1665
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 1673
coefficient; 1674
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1675
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1681
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 1684
coefficient. 1685
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1689
SuperHyperJoin. 1697
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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



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

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin

.
Proof. Let 1771
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 1775
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 1779

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

.
Proof. Let 1782
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1793
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1794

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 1804
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin

= (PERFECT MATCHING).
{Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) ,
∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
If ∃Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | =
6 min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |.
i
X
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 |
Proof. Let 1807
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 1812
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 1813
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1814
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1816
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1817
solution 1819
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 1826

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 |
Proof. Let 1829
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1830

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 1834
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 1835
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1836
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 1841
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 1849

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

.
Proof. Let 1852
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1853

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 1857
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 1858
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 1859
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1860
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 1867
Forms 1869
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 1870
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 1874
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1875
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 1876
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 1877
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 1879
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1880
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 1881
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 1882
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1884
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 1885
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 1886
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 1887
called 1890
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1891
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 1893
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1896
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 1898
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1899
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 1906
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1907
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 1908
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 1909
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1915
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1917
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 1918
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1926
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1928
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1933
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 1935
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1936
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 1943
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1944
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1952
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1954
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1963
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1968
SuperHyperPerfect. 1976
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2050
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2054
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2058
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2061
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2072
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2073

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2083
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-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)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2086
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 2091
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2092
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2095
solution 2098
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2105

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)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2108
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2109

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2113
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2114
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2120
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2128
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2131

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2132

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2136
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2137
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2138
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2146
Forms 2148
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2149
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2153
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2154
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2155
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2156
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2158
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2159
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2160
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2161
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2163
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2164
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2165
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2166
called 2169
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2170
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2172
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2177
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2178
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2180
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2185
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2186
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2187
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2194
coefficient; 2195
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2196
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2202
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2205
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2207
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2214
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2215
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2222
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2223
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2231
coefficient; 2232
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2233
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2239
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2242
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2247
SuperHyperTotal. 2255
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.


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

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

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

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+19i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 10z 10 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 11z 10 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+2i=011 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {E1 , E2 }.

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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2329
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2333
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2337
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2340
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1

Then 2351
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2352
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2362
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal

= {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)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2365
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2370
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2371
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2374
solution 2377
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2384

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)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2387
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2388

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2392
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2393
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2399
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2407
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2410
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2411

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2415
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2416
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2417
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2425
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2426
Forms 2427
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2428
SuperHyperConnected). 2429
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2433
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2434
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2435
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2436
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2437
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2438
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2440
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2441
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2442
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2443
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2444
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2445
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2447
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2448
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2449
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2450
called 2453
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2454
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2456
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2457
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2458
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2459
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2461
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2462
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2465
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2466
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2469
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2470
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2471
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2472
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2473
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2474
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2475
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2476
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2477
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2478
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2479
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2480
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2481
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2482
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2483
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2484
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2485
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2486
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 2487
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2488
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2489
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2490
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2491
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2494
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2495
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 2496
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 2497
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2498
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2499
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2502
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2503
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2506
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2507
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2510
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 2511
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2513
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 2514
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2516
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2518
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2521
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2522
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2523
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2524
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2527
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 2528
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2532
SuperHyperConnected. 2540
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.


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

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

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Ei+19i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 10z 10 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+119
i=11
, V22 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 11z 10 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-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 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 2614
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 2618
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2622
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 2625
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

Then 2636
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2637
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 2647
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vb
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2650
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2655
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2656
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2659
solution 2662
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 2669
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vb
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2672
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2677
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2678
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2684
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 2692
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2695
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2697

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2700
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2701
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 2702
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 2703
17 Background 2711
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 2712
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them date back on February 19, 2713
2023. 2714
First article is titled “properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 2715
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). It’s first step toward the 2716
research on neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. This research article is published on the 2717
journal “Neutrosophic Sets and Systems” in issue 49 and the pages 531-561. In this 2718
research article, different types of notions like dominating, resolving, Order, 2719
Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, n-Eulerian(Hamiltonian) neutrosophic path, 2720
zero forcing number, zero forcing neutrosophic- number, independent number, 2721
independent neutrosophic-number, clique number, clique neutrosophic-number, 2722
matching number, matching neutrosophic-number, girth, neutrosophic girth, 2723
1-zero-forcing number, 1-zero- forcing neutrosophic-number, failed 1-zero-forcing 2724
number, failed 1-zero-forcing neutrosophic-number, global- offensive alliance, t-offensive 2725
alliance, t-defensive alliance, t-powerful alliance, and global-powerful alliance are defined 2726
in SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Some Classes of 2727
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are cases of research. Some 2728
results are applied in family of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 2729
Thus this research article has concentrated on the vast notions and introducing the 2730
majority of notions. 2731
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 2732
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 2733
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 2734
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 2735
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 2736
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 2737
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 2738
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 2739
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 2740
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 2741
results based on initial background. 2742
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 2743
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 2744
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 2745
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 2746
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 2747
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 2748
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 2749
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 2750
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 2751
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 2752
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 2753
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 2754
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 2755
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 2756
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [52] by Henry Garrett 2757
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 2758
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 2759
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 2760
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 2761
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 2762
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 2763
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 2764
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 2765
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 2766
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Order alongside (Dual)Dominating in 2767
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 2768
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 2769
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 2770
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 2771
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 2772
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 2773
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 2774
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 2775
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2776
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 2777
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 2778
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 2779
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by 2780
Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 2781
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s 2782
Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry 2783
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 2784
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic 2785
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked 2786
Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled 2787
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2788
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 2789
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 2791
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by 2792
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 2793
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 2794
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2795
“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 2796
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry 2797
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 2798
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 2799
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 2800
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 2801
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 2802
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 2803
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 2804
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 2805
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 2806
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 2807
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 2808
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 2809
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by 2810
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2811
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by 2812
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 2813
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 2814
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 2815
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 2816
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 2817
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 2818
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [66] by Henry 2819
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 2820
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching 2821
Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [67] by Henry 2822
Garrett (2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 2823
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 2824
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [68] by Henry 2825
Garrett (2023), “Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of 2826
Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s 2827
Recognition called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [69] by Henry Garrett 2828
(2023), “Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 2829
Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 2830
Ref. [72] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every 2831
Embedded Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 2832
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in 2833
Ref. [73] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2834
Regions titled neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 2835
Recognition modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [76] by 2836
Henry Garrett (2023), “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 2837
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 2838
Ref. [79] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 2839
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 2840
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [80] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) 2841
SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled 2842
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 2844
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 2845
in Ref. [82] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in 2846
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [83] by Henry 2847
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2848
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 2849
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [84] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions 2850
Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 2851
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [95] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of 2852
Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on 2853
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in 2854
Ref. [96] by Henry Garrett (2022), there are some endeavors to formalize the basic 2855
SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 2856
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 2857
proposed as book in Ref. [97] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 2858
Scholar and has more than 3230 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 2859
Graphs” and published by Ohio: E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st 2860
Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 United State. This research book covers different 2861
types of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 2862
SuperHyperGraph theory. 2863
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 2864
proposed as book in Ref. [98] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google 2865
Scholar and has more than 4117 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 2866
and published by Florida: GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell 2867
Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. This research book presents different 2868
types of notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of 2869
duality in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This 2870
research book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 2871
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 2872
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 2873
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 2874
framework of Extreme SuperHyperDominating, Neutrosophic SuperHyperDominating 2875
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [5–96]. Two popular scientific 2876
research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 3230 and 4117 respectively, on 2877
neutrosophic science is on [97, 98]. 2878
– 2879
References 2880
1. Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2881
SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 2882
10.5281/zenodo.6456413). 2883
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf). 2884
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss journal/vol49/iss1/34). 2885
2. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 2886
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 2887
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 2888
3. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 2889
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 2890
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 2891
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 2892
4. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 2893
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 2894
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 2895
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 2896
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 2897
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 2898
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 2899
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Order alongside (Dual)Dominating in 2900
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 2901
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 2902
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 2903
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 2904
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 2905
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 2906
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 2907
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 2908
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 2909
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 2910
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 2911
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 2912
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 2913
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 2914
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 2915
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2916
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 2917
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 2918
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2919
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 2920
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 2921
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 2922
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 2923
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 2924
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 2925
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 2926
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 2927
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 2928
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2929
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 2930
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 2931
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 2932
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 2933
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 2934
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 2935
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 2936
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 2937
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 2938
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 2939
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2940
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 2941
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 2942
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 2943
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 2944
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 2945
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 2946
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 2948
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 2949
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2950
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 2951
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 2952
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 2953
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 2955
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 2959
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 2960
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 2961
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 2962
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 2963
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 2964
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 2965
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2966
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 2967
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 2968
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 2969
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 2970
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 2971
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 2972
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 2973
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 2974
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 2975
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 2976
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 2977
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 2978
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 2979
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 2980
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13397.09446). 2981
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 2982
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 2983
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 2984
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 2985
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 2986
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 2989
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11758.69441). 2990
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 2991
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 2992
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super 2995
Infections”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19360.87048). 2996
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 2997
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 2998
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3000
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3001
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super 3004
Vacancy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19911.37285). 3005
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3007
35. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3009
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3010
36. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3012
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3013
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3015
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3016
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3017
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3018
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Correction On Super 3019
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3020
39. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3021
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3022
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3024
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3025
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3026
41. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3027
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3028
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3029
42. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3030
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3031
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3032
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3033
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3036
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3037
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3040
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3041
45. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3042
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3044
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3045
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3048
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3049
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3052
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3053
48. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3054
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3055
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3056
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3057
49. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3058
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3059
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3060
50. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3061
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3062
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3063
51. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3064
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper 3065
Extensions of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3066
52. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3067
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3068
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3069
(2023) 35-47. 3070
53. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3071
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3072
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3073
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3074
54. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3075
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3076
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3077
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3078
55. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3079
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3080
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3081
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, 3082
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3083
56. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3084
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3085
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3086
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3087
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3088
57. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3089
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3090
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3091
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3092
58. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3093
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3094
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3095
59. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3096
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3097
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3099
60. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3100
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3101
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3102
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3103
61. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3104
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3105
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3106
62. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3107
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3108
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3109
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3110
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3111
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3112
63. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3113
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3114
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3115
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3116
64. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3117
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3118
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3119
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3120
65. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3121
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3122
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3123
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3124
66. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3125
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3126
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3127
67. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3128
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3129
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3130
68. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3132
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3134
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3135
69. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3136
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3137
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3138
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3139
70. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3140
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3142
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3143
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3145
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3146
72. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3147
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3148
73. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3150
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3151
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3152
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3157
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3161
76. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3162
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3163
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3164
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3165
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3168
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3170
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3171
79. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3172
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3173
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3176
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3177
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3179
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3180
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3183
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3184
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3186
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3187
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3190
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3191
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3193
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3194
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3196
87. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3198
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3201
88. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3203
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3206
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3213
91. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3214
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3215
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3216
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3217
92. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3218
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3219
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3220
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3221
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3224
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3225
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3228
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3229
95. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3230
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3231
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3232
96. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3233
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3234
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3235
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3236
97. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-publishing: 3237
Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grandview Heights, Ohio 43212 3238
United States. ISBN: 979-1-59973-725-6 3239
(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf). 3240
98. Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL 3241
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950 Miami, Florida 3242
33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0 3243
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf). 3244
View publication stats

New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super Landmarks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super Landmarks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · February 2023

329 PUBLICATIONS 4,192 CITATIONS

On Fuzzy Logic View project

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper 3

Enumerations On Super Landmarks 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

rv-SuperHyperOrder if Va , Vb ∈ V 0 , Va , Vb ∈ Ec such that d(Va ) 6= V (Eb ); and 17

|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 18

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

re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic 20

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

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

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

SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 24

re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic 25

rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 26

is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 27

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

Extreme SuperHyperOrder; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of 30

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 31

v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for a 32

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 33

cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 34

of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 35

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 36

SuperHyperOrder; an Extreme SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 37

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 38

v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for an 39

Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 40

Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 42

of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 43

Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 45

SuperHyperOrder SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 46

e-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic 47

v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for a 48

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-SuperHyperOrder if it’s 55

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperOrder 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

Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperOrder if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperOrder, 62

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperOrder, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperOrder, and Neutrosophic 63

rv-SuperHyperOrder and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 64

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 65