New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/369456588
New Ideas In Cancer's Recognition And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous
Preprint · March 2023

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
394 PUBLICATIONS 7,617 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
Number Graphs And Numbers View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 23 March 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 Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On 3
Super Nebulous 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
SuperHyperTrace-Cut). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 10
Trace-Cut pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 13
e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ P : P is a SuperHyperPath and it has all SuperHyperVertices;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 15
e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 16
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 19
∀Va ∈ Ea ∈ P : P is a SuperHyperPath and it has all SuperHyperVertices;
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 20
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 21
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 23
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and 24
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTrace-Cut). 25
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 26
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 27
Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 28
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 30
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 31
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the 32
conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 33
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; a 34
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 35
e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic 36
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for 37
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 38
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 39
of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 40
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 41
SuperHyperTrace-Cut; an Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 42
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 43
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 44
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 45
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 46
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an 47
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 48
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 49
SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 50
coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 51
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 52
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 53
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 54
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 55
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 56
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 57
conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 58
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and 59
the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme 60
V-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 61
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 64
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 65
conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 66
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; a 67
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 68
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for 70
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 72
of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 73
SuperHyperTrace-Cut; an Extreme V-SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 75
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic 76
re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic 77
rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 78
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients 79
defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 80
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 81
conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 82
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Extreme power is 83
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut 84
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 85
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 87
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 88
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 89
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 90
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 91
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 92
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 93
Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new 94
SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperTrace-Cut and Neutrosophic 95
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for 96
them but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, 97
and SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature 98
review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the 99
significancy of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 100
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions 101
are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with 102
different tools. The applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical 103
aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to 104
figure out the challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special 105
case is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. 106
Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. 107
These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 108
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 109
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 110
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 111
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 112
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 113
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 114
δ−SuperHyperTrace-Cut is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 115
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 116
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 117
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 118
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 119
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperTrace-Cut is a 120
maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 121
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 122
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 123
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 124
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 125
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 126
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 127
version of a SuperHyperTrace-Cut . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make 128
a SuperHyperTrace-Cut more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 129
SuperHyperTrace-Cut, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 130
“SuperHyperTrace-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 131
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the 132
usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperTrace-Cut . 133
It’s redefined a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the mentioned Table holds, 134
concerning, “The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and 135
SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, 136
“The Values of The Vertices & The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of 137
The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 138
Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The 139
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The 140
maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m 141
going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on a 142
SuperHyperTrace-Cut . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of 143
previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all 144
SuperHyperTrace-Cut until the SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then it’s officially called a 145
“SuperHyperTrace-Cut” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperTrace-Cut . There are some 146
instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperTrace-Cut 147
”. These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized 148
in the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperTrace-Cut . For 149
the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, there’s a need to “redefine” 150
the notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut” and a “Neutrosophic 151
SuperHyperTrace-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 152
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the 153
usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic 154
SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended 155
Table holds. And a SuperHyperTrace-Cut are redefined to a “Neutrosophic 156
SuperHyperTrace-Cut” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” 157
version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results 158
to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut more understandable. Assume a 159
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if 160
the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 161
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 162
SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 163
SuperHyperTrace-Cut”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic 164
SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic 165
SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a 166
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut” where it’s the strongest [the maximum 167
Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperTrace-Cut amid the maximum value amid 168
all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperTrace-Cut .] SuperHyperTrace-Cut . A 169
graph is a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements 170
of SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There 171
are some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one 172
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 173
SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 174
SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 175
all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 176
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, 177
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one 178
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 179
forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 180
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 181
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 182
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 183
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 184
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 185
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 186
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 187
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 188
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 189
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 190
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 191
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 192
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 193
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 194
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 195
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 196
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 197
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 198
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 199
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 200
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 201
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 202
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 203
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperTrace-Cut or the strongest 204
SuperHyperTrace-Cut in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 205
SuperHyperTrace-Cut, called SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and the strongest 206
SuperHyperTrace-Cut, called Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, some general results 207
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have 208
only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 209
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperTrace-Cut. There isn’t any 210
formation of any SuperHyperTrace-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 211
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic familiarity 212
with Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic 213
SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 214
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Cancer’s 215
Neutrosophic Recognition 216
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 217
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 218
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 219
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 220
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 221
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 222
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 223
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 224
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 225
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 226
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 227
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 228
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 229
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 230
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 231
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 232
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 233
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 234
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 235
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 236
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 237
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 238
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 239
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 240
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 241
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 242
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 243
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 244
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 245
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 246
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 247
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 248
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 249
formally called “ SuperHyperTrace-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 250
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 251
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 252
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 253
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 254
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 255
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 256
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 257
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 258
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 259
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 260
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 261
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperTrace-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 262
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 263
either the optimal SuperHyperTrace-Cut or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in 264
those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond 265
that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two 266
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 267
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperTrace-Cut. There isn’t any 268
formation of any SuperHyperTrace-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 269
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 270
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 271
find the “ amount of SuperHyperTrace-Cut” of either individual of cells or the groups of 272
cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 273
SuperHyperTrace-Cut” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of 274
cells? 275
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 276
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 277
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 278
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 279
SuperHyperTrace-Cut” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut” on 280
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 281
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 282
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 283
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 284
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 285
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 286
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 287
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 288
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 289
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 290
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 291
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 292
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 293
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperTrace-Cut” 294
and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut”. In the sense of tackling on getting results 295
and in Trace-Cut to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of 296
SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their 297
consequences, corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in 298
this section, titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 299
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 300
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 301
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 302
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 303
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 304
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 305
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 306
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 307
SuperHyperTrace-Cut”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut”, “Results on 308
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are 309
curious questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about 310
excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description 311
and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperTrace-Cut”. The 312
keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” 313
with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite 314
as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 315
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 316
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 317
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 318
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 319
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 320
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 321
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 322
Research On the Redeemed Ways 323
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 324
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [145],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 325
Set](Ref. [145],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 326
(NSHG)](Ref. [145],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 327
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [145],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [145], 328
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 329
(NSHG)](Ref. [145],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 330
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [145],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 331
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [145],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 332
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [145]. 333
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 334
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 335
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [145],Definition 2.1,p.1). 336
Let X be a Trace-Cut 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 337
+
]− 0, 1 [. 338
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [145],Definition 2.2,p.2). 339
Let X be a Trace-Cut 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. [145],Definition 340
2.5,p.2). 341
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 342
pair S = (V, E), where 343
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 344
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 345
1, 2, . . . , n); 346
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 347
V; 348
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 349
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 350
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 351
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 352
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 353
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 354
(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 . 355
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 356
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 357
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 358
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 359
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 360
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 361
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 362
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 363
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 364
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 365
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 366
(Ref. [145],Definition 2.7,p.3). 367
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 368
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 369
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 370
characterized as follow-up items. 371
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 372
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 373
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 374
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 375
HyperEdge; 376
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 377
SuperEdge; 378
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 379
SuperHyperEdge. 380
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 381
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 382
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [145], Definition 2.7, p.3). 383
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 384
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 385
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 386
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 387
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 388
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 389
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)). 390
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 391
pair S = (V, E), where 392
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 393
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 394
1, 2, . . . , n); 395
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 396
V; 397
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 398
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 399
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 400
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 401
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 402
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 403
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 404
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 405
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 406
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 407
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 408
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 409
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 410
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 411
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 412
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 413
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 414
(Ref. [145],Definition 2.7,p.3). 415
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 416
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 417
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 418
characterized as follow-up items. 419
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 420
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 421
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 422
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 423
HyperEdge; 424
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 425
SuperEdge; 426
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 427
SuperHyperEdge. 428
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 429
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 430
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 431
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 432
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 433
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 434
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 435
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 436
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 437
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 438
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 439
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 440
given SuperHyperEdges; 441
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 442
SuperHyperEdges; 443
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 444
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 445
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 446
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 447
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 448
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 449
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 450
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 451
common SuperVertex. 452
Definition 3.14. Let a 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 453
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 454
of following conditions hold: 455
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 456
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 457
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 458
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 459
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 460
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 461
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 462
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 463
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 464
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 465
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 466
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 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 ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 467
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 468
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 469
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 470
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 471
SuperHyperPath . 472
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 473
(Ref. [145],Definition 5.3,p.7). 474
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 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 475
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 476
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 477
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 478
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 479
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 480
(NSHE)). (Ref. [145],Definition 5.4,p.7). 481
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 482
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 483
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 484
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 485
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 486
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 487
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 488
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 490
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 491
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 493
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 494
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 495
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 496
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 497
SuperHyperTrace-Cut). 498
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 500
either V 0 or E 0 is called 501
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called 502
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 503
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called 504
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 505
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 506
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called 507
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 508
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut f the following expression is called 509
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 510
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 511
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 512
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 514
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTrace-Cut). 515
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 518
v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 520
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 521
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 522
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 523
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 524
the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 525
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 526
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 529
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 530
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 533
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 534
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 535
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut 536
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 537
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 539
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 540
the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 542
Extreme coefficient; 543
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 544
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic 545
re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and 546
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 548
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 549
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 550
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 551
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 552
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power is 553
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 554
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 555
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 560
the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 562
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 563
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 567
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 570
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 571
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 575
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 576
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 577
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 578
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 579
Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 580
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 582
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 588
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power is 591
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 592
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperTrace-Cut). 593
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 594
(i) an δ−SuperHyperTrace-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 595
SuperHyperTrace-Cut such that either of the following expressions hold for the 596
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 597
|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 598
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 599
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperTrace-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of 600
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut such that either of the following Neutrosophic 601
expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 602
s∈S: 603
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ.
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. 604
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 605
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 606
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, there’s a need to 607
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 608
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 609
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 610
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 611
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 612
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 613
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 614
understandable. 615
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 616
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 617
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperTrace-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 618
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 619
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)
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 620
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 621
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 622
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 623
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 624
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 625
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut more Neutrosophicly understandable. 626
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, there’s a need to 627
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut”. The 628
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 629
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 630
assign to the values. 631
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperTrace-Cut. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 632
SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the Table (3) holds. 633
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut But As The 634
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 635
Forms 636
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 637

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is called 639
Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is called 640
Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic probability 641
of A. 642
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 643
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 645
Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 646
s-independent criteria 647
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 648
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 649
criteria 650
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 651
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Any k-function Trace-Cut like E is called 653
Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Trace-Cut like E is called 654
Neutrosophic Variable. 655
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 656
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 657
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is 659
called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 660
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 661
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 662
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. A Neutrosophic number is called Neutrosophic 664
Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic Crossing criteria 665
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 666
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let m and n propose 667
special Trace-Cut. Then with m ≥ 4n, 668
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 669
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 670
Neutrosophic independently with probability Trace-Cut p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] 671
and H := G[S]. 672
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Neutrosophic number of

SuperHyperVertices, Y the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperEdges, and Z the
Neutrosophic number of crossings of H. The trivial bound noted above, when applied to
H, yields the inequality Z ≥ cr(H) ≥ Y − 3X. By linearity of Neutrosophic Expectation,
E(Z) ≥ E(Y ) − 3E(X).
Now E(X) = pn, E(Y ) = p2 m (each SuperHyperEdge having some SuperHyperEnds)
and E(Z) = p4 cr(G) (each crossing being defined by some SuperHyperVertices). Hence
p4 cr(G) ≥ p2 m − 3pn.
Dividing both sides by p4 , we have: 673
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ 3
= 3 = m n .
p (4n/m) 64
674
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 675
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet 676
of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperLines

√ in the 677
plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then 678
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 679
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 680
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive 681
points on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 682
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 683
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 684
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 685
2 3
again l < 32n /k . 686
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet 688
of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 689
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 690
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 691
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 692
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 693
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 694
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
695
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 696
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints 697
on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 698
n−1
X
e(H) = ini = 2k − n1 − 2n2 ≥ 2k − 2n.
i=3
Some SuperHyperPairs of SuperHyperVertices of H might be joined by some parallel 699
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 700
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 701
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 702
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 703
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 704
4/3 4/3
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n + n < 5n . 705
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 706
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let X be a nonnegative 707
Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 708
E(X)
P (X ≥ t) ≤ .
t
Proof.
X X
E(X) = {X(a)P (a) : a ∈ V } ≥ {X(a)P (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t}
X X
{tP (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t} = t {P (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t}
tP (X ≥ t).
Dividing the first and last members by t yields the asserted inequality. 709
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 710
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let Xn be a nonnegative 711
integer-valued variable in a probability Trace-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 as 712
n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 713
Proof. 714
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. A special SuperHyperGraph 716
in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 717
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is 719
up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of 720
G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 721
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 722
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 723
G. 724
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 725
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 726
E(XS ) = P (XS = 1) = P (AS ) = (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 .
Let X be the number of stable SuperHyperSets of cardinality k + 1 in G. Then 727
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 728
X
E(X) = {E(XS ) : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1} = (n choose k+1)(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 .
We bound the right-hand side by invoking two elementary inequalities: 729
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 730
nk+1 e−p)(k+1)choose2 ne−pk/2k+1

E(X) ≤ =
(k + 1)! (k + 1)!
Suppose now that k = d2p−1 log ne. Then k ≥ 2p−1 log n, so ne−pk/2 ≤ 1. Because k 731
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 732
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 733
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 734
stability number at most k. 735
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 736
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is 738
called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 739
Variance criteria 740
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let X be a Neutrosophic 742
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 743
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let X be a Neutrosophic Variable and 745
let t be a positive real number. Then 746
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
747
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let Xn be a Neutrosophic 749
Variable in a probability Trace-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 750
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 751
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 753
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 754
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 755
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 757
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 758
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 759
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 760
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 762
result is straightforward. 763
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let f 765
and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 766
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 767
or 768
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 769
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 771
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 772
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let P be a monotone property of 774
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 775
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 776
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 777
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 778
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 779
S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 781
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 782
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 783
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. Let F be a nonempty 785
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 786
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 787
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 788
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Trace-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 790
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 791
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 792
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 793
SuperHyperTrace-Cut, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 794
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 795
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 796
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 797
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 798
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 799
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 800
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 801
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 802
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Trace-Cut

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Trace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Trace-Cut
= {{V1 , V2 , V4 }}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Trace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
803
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 806
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 807
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 808
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 809
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 810
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 811

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {{V1 , V2 , V4 }}.
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
813

straightforward. 816

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {{V1 , V2 , V4 }}.
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
817

= {E4 (E5 ), E1 , E2 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
= {{V1 , V2 , V4 }}.
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
821




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
825

= {Eii=110 , E22 , Eii=2332 }.
= 21z 2 .
= {{Vi , Vi+1 }, {V20 , V22 }}21
i6=20,i=1 .
X
= ai z bj .
ai ,bj ∼C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Trace-Cut

829

= {E15 , E13 , E16 , E14 , E17 }.
= 2z 5 + z 4 + 2z 2 .
= {{Vi=13 , V12 }, {Vi=47 , V13 }, {Vi=811 , V14 }}.
X
= ai z bj .
833


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {{}}.
= z0.
837

= {Eii=110 , E22 , E23 }.
= 21z 2 .
= {{Vi , Vi+1 }, {V10 , V21 }, {Vii6=21,i=1122 }9i6=20,i=1 .
X
= ai z bj .
841


Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)

= {E1 , E6 , E2 , E7 , E3 }.
= 2z 5 + z 4 + 2z 2 .
= {{Vi=13 , V12 }, {Vi=47 , V13 }, {Vi=811 , V14 }}.
X
= ai z bj .
845

= {E1 , E6 , E3 }.
= 2z 3 + z 2 .
= {{V1 , V2 , V3 }, {V1 , V5 }, {V4 , V5 , V6 }}.
= 3z 5 + z 4 + 2z 3 .
849


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {{}}.
= z0.
853

= {E9 , E6 , E3 }.
= 2z 3 + z 2 .
= {{V1 , V2 , V3 }, {V1 , V5 }, {V4 , V5 , V6 }}.
= 3z 5 + z 4 + 2z 3 .
857




= {E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 3 + z 2 .
= {{V1 , V2 }, {V1 , V3 }}.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
861


= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
= 5z 2 .
= {{V1 , V5 }, {V1 , V2 }, {V2 , V3 }, {V3 , V4 }, {V4 , V6 }}.
= 3z 5 + z 4 + 2z 3 .
865

= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
= z 10 + z 7 + z 6 + z 5 + z 2 .
= {{Vi }17 22 11 6
i=1 , {Vi , V15 }i=17 , {Vi }i=6 , {Vi }i=2 , {V1 , V2 }}.
X
= ai z bj .
869


= {E6 , E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
= z 10 + z 8 + z 7 + z 6 + z 5 + z 2 .
= {{Vi }17 29 22 11 6
i=1 , {Vi , V1 }i=23 , {Vi , V15 }i=17 , {Vi }i=6 , {Vi }i=2 , {V1 , V2 }}.
X
= ai z bj .
873

= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 , E6 }.
= z 10 + z 8 + z 7 + z 6 + z 5 + z 3 .
= {{Vi }17 29 22 11 6
i=1 , {Vi , V1 }i=23 , {Vi , V15 }i=17 , {Vi }i=6 , {Vi }i=2 , {V1 , V2 , V23 }}.
X
= ai z bj .
877




= {Ei12
i=1
}.
X
= ai z bj .
ai ,bj ∼C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Trace-Cut

= {{VEi12 }}.
i=1

X
= ai z bj .
881

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {{}}.
= z0.
885


= {E2 }.
= z 10 .
= {VE2 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + 7z.
889

= {E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
= z 12 + z 10 + z 9 + z 6 .
= {{VE2 }, {VE3 }, {VE4 }, {VE5 }}.
= z 5 + 3z 4 + 5z 3 + z 2 + 19z.


893
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 894
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 895
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 896
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 897
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 898
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 899
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 900
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 901
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 902
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut minus all Neutrosophic 903
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 904
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 905
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut, minus all 906
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 907
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic
R-Trace-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut is 908
at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 909
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 910
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 911
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 912
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Trace-Cut in some cases but the 913
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Neutrosophic 914
number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 915
are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. 916
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Trace-Cut has, the least Neutrosophic
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality, is the
Neutrosophic cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s a Neutrosophic type-result-R-Trace-Cut with the least Neutrosophic cardinality, 917
the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 918
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 919
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 920
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−Cut = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−T race−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Trace-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower 921
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Trace-Cut is the 922
cardinality of 923
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−Cut = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−T race−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Proof. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {z} isn’t a quasi-R-Trace-Cut
since neither amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges nor amount of
SuperHyperVertices where amount refers to the Neutrosophic number of
SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges) more than one to form any kind of
SuperHyperEdges or any number of SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices has the

eligibilities to propose property such that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but the maximum
Neutrosophic cardinality indicates that these Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets
couldn’t give us the Neutrosophic lower bound in the term of Neutrosophic sharpness.
In other words, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }}
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices implies at least on-quasi-triangle style is up but

sometimes the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is free-quasi-triangle and it doesn’t make a

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the
generality of the connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. Thus if we
assume in the worst case, literally,
V \ V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
Is a quasi-R-Trace-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp bound for
the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Trace-Cut is the cardinality of
Then we’ve lost some connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of the

connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and
their quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Trace-Cut. It’s
the contradiction to that fact on the generality. There are some counterexamples to
deny this statement. One of them comes from the setting of the graph titled path and
cycle as the counterexamples-classes or reversely direction star as the examples-classes,
are well-known classes in that setting and they could be considered as the
examples-classes and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
Let V \ V \ {z} in mind. There’s no necessity on the SuperHyperEdge since we need at 924
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 925
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 926
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 927
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 928
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 929
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 930
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 931
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut decorates the

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Neutrosophic connections so
as this Neutrosophic style implies different versions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges
with the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality in the terms of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The lower Neutrosophic bound is to have the
maximum Neutrosophic groups of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have perfect
Neutrosophic connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges and the outside of this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the connectedness of the
used Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph arising from its Neutrosophic properties taken
from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, then there’s no
Neutrosophic connection. Furthermore, the Neutrosophic existence of one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex has no Neutrosophic effect to talk about the Neutrosophic
R-Trace-Cut. Since at least two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices involve to make a
title in the Neutrosophic background of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
but at least two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices make the Neutrosophic version of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Neutrosophic setting of non-obvious
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge.
It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is used as Neutrosophic adjective for
the initial Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no Neutrosophic appearance
of the loop Neutrosophic version of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The Neutrosophic adjective
“loop” on the basic Neutrosophic framework engages one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex but it never happens in this Neutrosophic setting. With these

Neutrosophic bases, on a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, there’s at least one
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at least a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut has the
Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic
R-Trace-Cut has the Neutrosophic cardinality at least a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge.
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut since either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is an
obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel thus it never happens since there’s no
Neutrosophic usage of this Neutrosophic framework and even more there’s no
Neutrosophic connection inside or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious and
as its consequences, there’s a Neutrosophic contradiction with the term “Neutrosophic
R-Trace-Cut” since the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality never happens for this
Neutrosophic style of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no
Neutrosophic connection inside as mentioned in first Neutrosophic case in the forms of
drawback for this selected Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Neutrosophic case implies having the Neutrosophic style of
on-quasi-triangle Neutrosophic style on the every Neutrosophic elements of this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Precisely, the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut is the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that some
Neutrosophic amount of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle
Neutrosophic style. The Neutrosophic cardinality of the v SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet

But the lower Neutrosophic bound is up. Thus the minimum Neutrosophic cardinality
of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality ends up the Neutrosophic discussion. The
first Neutrosophic term refers to the Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph but this key point is enough since there’s a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperClass of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has no on-quasi-triangle
Neutrosophic style amid some amount of its Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. This
Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel proposes a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet has only some amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from one
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge such that there’s no Neutrosophic amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges more than one involving these some amount of these
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The Neutrosophic cardinality of this Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet is the maximum and the Neutrosophic case is occurred in the minimum
Neutrosophic situation. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
Has the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such that

Contains some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

distinct-covers-order-amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges for amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices taken from the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
It means that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
Is a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 932
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 933
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 934
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 935
free-quasi-triangle. 936
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic

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

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

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. Let

E
Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 937
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
938
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut where E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is

fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic intended
SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Trace-Cut, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could be
different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the Neutrosophic
cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut 939
is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of 940
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 941
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 942
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 943
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Trace-Cut in some cases but the 944
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 945
Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic 946
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. 947
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 948
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 949
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 950
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 951
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 952
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 953
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 954
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 955
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 956
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 957
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 958
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut where the 959
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 960
literarily, a Neutrosophic embedded R-Trace-Cut. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 961
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 962
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 963
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 964
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 965
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 966
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. The interior 967
types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the Neutrosophic 968
number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior Neutrosophic 969
SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more formal, the 970
perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any distinct 971
types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. Thus 972
Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Neutrosophic 973
SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the interior 974
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In the 975
embedded Neutrosophic Trace-Cut, there’s the usage of exterior Neutrosophic 976
SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the 977
title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One Neutrosophic 978
SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 979
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement has been ignored in 980
the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. The 981
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut with the exclusion of the exclusion of all Neutrosophic 982
SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the 983
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut with the inclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in 984
one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut. To sum them 985
up, in a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 986
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the 987
maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of 988
any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor 989
to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique 990
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 991
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut, minus all Neutrosophic 992
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 993
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut has two titles. a Neutrosophic 994
quasi-R-Trace-Cut and its corresponded quasi-maximum Neutrosophic 995
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any 996
Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut with that 997
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 998
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 999
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1000
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cuts for all Neutrosophic numbers less 1001
than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the Neutrosophic 1002
Trace-Cut ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the Neutrosophic 1003
quasi-R-Trace-Cut, again and more in the operations of collecting all the Neutrosophic 1004
quasi-R-Trace-Cuts acted on the all possible used formations of the Neutrosophic 1005
SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. This Neutrosophic number is 1006
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Trace-Cuts. Let 1007
zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Trace-Cut be a 1008
Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Trace-Cut. 1009
Then 1010
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Trace-Cut ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is 1011
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1012
GNeutrosophic Trace-Cut ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

∪zNeutrosophic Number {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1013
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut. 1014
GNeutrosophic Trace-Cut =
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
= zNeutrosophic Number |
= max zNeutrosophic Number }.
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Neutrosophic 1015
Trace-Cut poses the upcoming expressions. 1016
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1017
= max zNeutrosophic Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1018

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1019


1020
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1021

1022

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1023
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1024
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1025
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1026
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Trace-Cut” but, precisely, it’s the generalization 1027
of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Trace-Cut” since “Neutrosophic Quasi-Trace-Cut” happens 1028
“Neutrosophic Trace-Cut” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1029
background but “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens 1030
“Neutrosophic Trace-Cut” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1031
preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic 1032
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, 1033
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Neutrosophic Quasi-Trace-Cut”, and 1034
“Neutrosophic Trace-Cut” are up. 1035
Thus, let zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1036
GNeutrosophic Trace-Cut be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1037
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Trace-Cut and the new terms are up. 1038

∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1039
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1040
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1041
And with go back to initial structure, 1042


1043
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1044

1045

Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1046
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Trace-Cut if for 1047
any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some 1048
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic 1049
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic 1050
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1051
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1052
are coming up. 1053
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. The

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1054
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1055
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by
Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is related to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex inside the intended

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is up. The
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex.
But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
doesn’t have less than two SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far an SuperHyperEdge. Thus the
non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut
is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-Trace-Cut. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1056
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1057
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1058
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1059
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut and it’s an Neutrosophic 1060
Trace-Cut. Since it’s 1061
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge for some amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given
by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut. There
isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Trace-Cut, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1062
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1063
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1064
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1065
“Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut” 1066
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1067
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut, 1068
is only and only
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only a Neutrosophic free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and a Neutrosophic on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also
it’s a Neutrosophic stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut amid those

obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1069
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1070
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1071
quasi-R-Trace-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1072
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1073
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1074
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1075
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1076
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1077
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1078
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1079
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1080
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1081
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut with the least cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic 1082
bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1083
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1084
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1085
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1086
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1087
R-Trace-Cut. Since it doesn’t have 1088
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1089
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1090
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1091
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1092
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1093
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic procedure 1094
such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic 1095
SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1096
outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1097
ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its Neutrosophic 1098
SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the Neutrosophic 1099
SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. There’s only one 1100
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1101
VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the 1102
obvious Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut, VESHE is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic 1103
type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut, VESHE , is a Neutrosophic 1104
SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices does 1105
forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in 1106
a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic 1107
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1108
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1109
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1110
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1111
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1112
Neutrosophic R-Trace-Cut only contains all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 1113
and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique Neutrosophic 1114
SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1115
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1116
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1117
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1118
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1119
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Trace-Cut, is up. There’s neither empty 1120
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1121
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1122
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut. The Neutrosophic 1123
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1124
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−Cut

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−T race−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−T race−Cut = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−T race−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut. The 1125
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1126
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1127

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Neutrosophic Trace-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1128
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1129
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1131
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1132
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1133
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1134
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is up. The 1135
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is 1136
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1137
But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1138

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic 1140
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1141
Neutrosophic Trace-Cut is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 1142
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1143

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1144
Trace-Cut. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1145

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Neutrosophic Trace-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1147
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1148
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1149
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1150
called the Neutrosophic Trace-Cut and it’s an Neutrosophic Trace-Cut. Since it’s 1151
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1153
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1154
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1155
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1156
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1157

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Trace-Cut, 1158

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1159
Trace-Cut, not: 1160

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1161

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1162
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1163
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1164
“Neutrosophic Trace-Cut” 1165
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1166
Neutrosophic Trace-Cut, 1167
is only and only 1168

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1169
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1170
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1171
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1172
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1173
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1174
Then 1175

= {Eii6=1,|EN SHG | }.
X
=
Eii6=1,|E z |Ei | .
N SHG |

= {{VEii6=1,|E }}.
N SHG |

X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1176
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1177
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Example (16.5)
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1178
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1179
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 1180
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTrace-Cut. The latter is 1181
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1183
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1184
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1185
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1186
Then 1187

= {Eii6=1,|EN SHG | }.
X
=
Eii6=1,|E z |Ei | .
N SHG |

= {{VEii6=1,|E }}.
N SHG |

X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1188
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1189
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 1190
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1191

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1195
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1196
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1197
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1199
Then 1200

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {{}}.
= z0.
Proof. Let 1201
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

1202
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1203
There’s a new way to redefine as 1204

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1208
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1209
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1210
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1211
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1212
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1213
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1214

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {{}}.
= z0.
Proof. Let 1215
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1216
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1217
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1218

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Thus the notion of 1221
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTrace-Cut could be 1222
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 1223
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1224
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTrace-Cut taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1225
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1226
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1227
solution 1228
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1229
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1230
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1231
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1232
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1233
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1234
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1235
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1236
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1237

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {{}}.
= z0.
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Example (16.11)
Proof. Let 1238
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
1239
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
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1241

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Thus the notion of 1244
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTrace-Cut could be 1245
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 1246
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Example (16.13)
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1248
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1249
solution 1251
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1253
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1254
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1255
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1256
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1257
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1258
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1259
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1260
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 1261

= {Eii6=1,|EN SHG | ,Ek∗ }.
X
=
∗
Eii6=1,|E z |Ei | +z |Ek | .
N SHG |

= {{VEii6=1,|E },{VE ∗ }}.
N SHG | k

X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1262
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1263
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1265

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Thus the notion of 1268
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTrace-Cut could be 1269
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperTrace-Cut proposes some longest 1270
SuperHyperTrace-Cut excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 1271
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1274
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1275
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1276
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1277
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1279
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1280
For the SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and the 1281
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, some general results are introduced. 1282
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.15)
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut is “redefined” on 1283
the positions of the alphabets. 1284
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Then 1285
N eutrosophic SuperHyperT race − Cut =

{theSuperHyperT race − Cutof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperT race − Cut
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperT race−Cut. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1286
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1287
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1288
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1289
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 1290
SuperHyperTrace-Cut coincide. 1291
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1293
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut if and only if it’s a SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1294
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1296
strongest SuperHyperTrace-Cut if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1297
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1298
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut is its 1299
SuperHyperTrace-Cut and reversely. 1300
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 1301
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1302
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut is 1303
its SuperHyperTrace-Cut and reversely. 1304
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1305
SuperHyperTrace-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperTrace-Cut isn’t 1306
well-defined. 1307
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1308
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1309
SuperHyperTrace-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1310
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1313
SuperHyperTrace-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1314
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1315
SuperHyperTrace-Cut is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperTrace-Cut is 1316
well-defined. 1317
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1318
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1319
SuperHyperTrace-Cut is well-defined. 1320
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1323
SuperHyperTrace-Cut is well-defined. 1324
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1325
is 1326
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1327
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1328
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1329
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1330
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1331
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1332
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1333
∅ is 1334
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1335
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1336
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1337
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1338
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1339
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1340
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1341
independent SuperHyperSet is 1342
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1343
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1344
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1345
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1346
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1347
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1348
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1349
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperTrace-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1350
maximal 1351
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1352
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1353
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1354
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1355
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1356
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1357
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1358
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1359
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1360
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1361
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1362
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1363
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1364
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1365
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1366
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1367
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperTrace-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then the number 1369
of 1370
(i) : the SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1371
(ii) : the SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1372
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1373
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1374
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1375
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1376
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1377
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1378
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1380
(i) : the dual SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1381
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1382
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1383
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1384
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1385
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1386
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1387
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1390
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1391
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1392
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1393
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1397
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1398
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1399
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1402
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1403
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1404
is a 1405
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1409
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1410
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1411
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1414
number of 1415
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1419
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1420
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1421
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1422
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1423
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1424
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1426
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1427
(iv) : SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1431
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1432
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1433
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1434
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1435
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1436
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1437
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1438
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1442
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1444
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1446
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1447
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1451
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1452
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1453
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1455
SuperHyperTrace-Cut/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1457
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1458
of a dual 1459
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1463
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1464
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1465
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1467
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1468
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1469
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1475
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1476
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1477
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1478
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1479
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1480
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1481
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1482
that 1483
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1484
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1485
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1486
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then 1487
(i) S is SuperHyperTrace-Cut set; 1488
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1489
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1490
Then 1491
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1492
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1493
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1494
which is connected. Then 1495
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1496
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1497
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1498
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1499
SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1500
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1501
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1502
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1503
a dual SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1504
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1505
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1506
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1507
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1508
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1509
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1510
dual SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1511
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Then 1512
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1513
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1515
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1516
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1517
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1518
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Then 1520
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1521
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1523
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1524
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1525
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1527
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1528
(ii) Γ = 1; 1529
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1530
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1531
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1532
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1533
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1534
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1535
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1536
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1537
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1538
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1539
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1540
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1542
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1543
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1544
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1546
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1547
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1549

bnc ; 1550
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1551
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1553
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1554
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1555
SuperHyperTrace-Cut for N SHF; 1556
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1557
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1558
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1559
SuperHyperTrace-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1560
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1561
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1562
SuperHyperSet. Then 1563
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1564
SuperHyperTrace-Cut for N SHF; 1565
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1566

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1567
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperTrace-Cut 1568
for N SHF : (V, E). 1569
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1570
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1571
SuperHyperSet. Then 1572
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1573
SuperHyperTrace-Cut for N SHF : (V, E); 1574
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1575

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1576
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperTrace-Cut for 1577
N SHF : (V, E). 1578
Then following statements hold; 1580
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1581
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1582
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1584
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then S is a dual 1585
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1586
Then following statements hold; 1588
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1589
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1590
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1592
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut, then S is a dual 1593
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1594
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1595
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1596
statements hold; 1597
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1598
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1599
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1600
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1602
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1604
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1605
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1606
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1607
statements hold; 1608
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1609
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1611
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1613
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1615
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1616
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1618
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1619
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1620
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1622
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1624
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1627
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1629
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1630
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1631
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1633
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1635
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut; 1636
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1638
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1640
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1641
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1642
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1644
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1646
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1649
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1651
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1652
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1653
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1655
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1657
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1660
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1661
Neutrosophic Recognition 1662
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1663
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1664
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1665
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1666
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1667
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1668
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1669
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1670
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1671
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1672
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1673
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1674
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1675
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1676
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1677
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1678
happened and what’s done. 1679
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

sophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1680
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1681
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1682
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1683
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperTrace-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 1684
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1685
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut or the Neutrosophic 1686
SuperHyperTrace-Cut in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1687
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1688
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1689
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1690
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1691
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1692
featured. 1693
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1694
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1695
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1696
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1697
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the 1698
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (29), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1699
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1700
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1701
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1702
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1703
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1704
Neutrosophic featured. 1705
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1706
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1707
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1708
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1709
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1710
SuperHyperModel (30), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. 1711
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1712
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1713
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1714
The SuperHyperTrace-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut are defined 1715
on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1716
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1717
recognitions? 1718
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperTrace-Cut 1719
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut? 1720
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1721
compute them? 1722
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1723
SuperHyperTrace-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut? 1724
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperTrace-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut 1725
do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on 1726
SuperHyperTrace-Cut, are there else? 1727
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1728
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1729
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1730
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1731
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1732
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1733
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1734
highlighted. 1735
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1736
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1737
SuperHyperTrace-Cut. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1738
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1739
the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1740
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut, finds the convenient background to implement 1741
some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic 1742
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1743
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1744
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1745
SuperHyperTrace-Cut, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are 1746
introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on the 1747
SuperHyperTrace-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut. The clarifications, 1748
instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this research, the 1749
literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the results. The 1750
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on 1751
the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this research. 1752
Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and 1753
embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1754
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1755
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1756
called “ SuperHyperTrace-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix 1757
“SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the background 1758
for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this research are,
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperTrace-Cut
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1759
figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1760
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1761
Forms 1763
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1764
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1768
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1769
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1770
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1771
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1772
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1773
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1774
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1775
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1776
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1777
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1778
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1779
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1780
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1781
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1784
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1786
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1787
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1788
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1789
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1791
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1792
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1796
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1799
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1800
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1801
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1802
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1808
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1810
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1811
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1813
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1814
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1815
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1816
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 1817
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1819
Neutrosophic coefficient; 1820
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1821
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 1826
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1828
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1829
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1833
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1836
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1837
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1842
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1843
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1845
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1847
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1853
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1856
Neutrosophic coefficient. 1857
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1861
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1862
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1863
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1864
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1865
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1866
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1867
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1868
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. 1877


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 1940
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1941
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

= {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 1942
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 1946
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1950
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1951
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1952
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 1953
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1964
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 1965
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1975
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 1978
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 1983
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1984
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1985
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1986
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1987
solution 1990
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1997

= {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 2000
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2001

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2007
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2012
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2020
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 2023
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 2024
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2025

∃!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 2030
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2031
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2038
Forms 2040
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2041
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2045
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2046
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2047
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2048
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2050
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2051
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2052
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2053
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2055
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2056
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2057
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2058
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2061
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2062
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2063
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2064
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2065
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2066
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2068
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2069
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2071
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2072
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2076
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2077
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2078
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2079
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2080
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2085
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2087
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 2090
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2092
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2093
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2096
coefficient; 2097
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2098
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2101
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2102
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2103
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2105
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2106
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2113
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2114
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2122
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2124
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2130
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2133
coefficient. 2134
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2138
SuperHyperJoin. 2146
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .


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 = {V5 }.
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 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 = 10z.

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 2220
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2224
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2228

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

.
Proof. Let 2231
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2242
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 2243

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2253
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 2256
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 2261
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2262
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2263
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2265
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2266
solution 2268
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2275

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 2278
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2279

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2283
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2284
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2285
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2290
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2298

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

.
Proof. Let 2301
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2302

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2306
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2307
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2308
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2309
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2316
Forms 2318
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2319
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2323
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2324
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2325
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2326
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2328
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2329
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2330
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2331
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2333
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2334
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2335
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2336
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2339
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2341
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2344
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2346
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2347
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2354
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2355
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2356
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2357
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2363
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2365
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2366
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2371
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2374
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2376
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2381
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2383
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2384
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2391
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2392
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2400
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2402
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2408
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2411
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2416
SuperHyperPerfect. 2424
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 2498
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2502
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2506
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 2509
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2520
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2521

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2531
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 2534
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 2539
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2540
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2543
solution 2546
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2553

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 2556
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2557

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2561
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2562
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2568
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2576
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2579

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2580

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2584
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2585
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2586
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2587
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2594
Forms 2596
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2597
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2601
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2602
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2603
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2604
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2606
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2607
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2608
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2609
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2611
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2612
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2613
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2614
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2617
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2619
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2622
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2624
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2625
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2627
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2632
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2633
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2634
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2641
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2643
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2649
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2652
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2654
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2659
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2661
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2662
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2669
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2670
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2678
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2680
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2686
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2689
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2694
SuperHyperTotal. 2702
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 2776
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2780
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2784
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 2787
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 2798
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 2799
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2809
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 2812
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2817
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2818
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2821
solution 2824
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2831

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 2834
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2835

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2839
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2840
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2846
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2854
∗
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 2857
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2858

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2862
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2863
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2864
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2865
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2872
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2873
Forms 2874
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2875
SuperHyperConnected). 2876
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2880
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2881
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2882
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2883
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2884
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2885
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2887
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2888
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2889
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2890
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2891
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2892
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2894
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2895
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2896
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2897
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2900
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2902
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2905
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2907
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2908
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2912
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2915
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2916
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2917
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2918
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2919
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2920
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2921
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2922
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2923
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2924
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2925
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2926
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2927
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2928
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2929
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2932
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2935
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2936
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2937
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2942
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2944
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2945
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2949
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2952
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2953
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2956
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 2957
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 2958
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2959
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 2960
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2962
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2964
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2967
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2970
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2973
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 2974
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2978
SuperHyperConnected. 2986
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 3060
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 3064
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3068
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 3071
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 3082
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 3083
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3093
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 3096
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3101
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3102
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3105
solution 3108
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3115
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 3118
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3123
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3124
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3130
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3138
∗
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 3141
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3143

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3146
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3147
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3148
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3149
17 Background 3157
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3158
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3159
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3160
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3161
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3162
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3163
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3164
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3165
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3166
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3167
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3168
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3169
results based on initial background. 3170
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3171
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3172
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3173
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3174
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3175
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3176
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3177
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3178
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3179
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3180
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3181
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3182
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3183
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3184
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3185
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3186
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3187
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3188
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3189
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3190
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3191
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3192
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3193
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3194
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3195
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3196
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 3197
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3198
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3199
in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3200
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3201
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [7] by 3202
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3203
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3204
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3205
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3206
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3207
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [9] by Henry 3208
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3209
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3210
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3211
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3212
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3213
Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3214
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3215
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3216
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3217
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs 3218
To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3219
Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3220
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 3221
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 3222
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3223
Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in 3224
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3225
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3226
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3227
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in 3228
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [17] by Henry 3229
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3230
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3231
in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3232
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3233
Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3234
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 3235
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 3236
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [20] by 3237
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3238
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [21] by 3239
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3240
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 3241
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 3242
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3243
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett 3244
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3245
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [115] by Henry 3246
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3247
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching 3248
Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [116] by Henry 3249
Garrett (2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3250
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3251
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [117] by Henry 3252
Garrett (2023), “Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of 3253
Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s 3254
Recognition called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [118] by Henry Garrett 3255
(2023), “Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3256
Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3257
Ref. [121] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every 3258
Embedded Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3259
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in 3260
Ref. [122] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 3261
Regions titled neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3262
Recognition modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [125] by 3263
Henry Garrett (2023), “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3264
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3265
Ref. [128] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3266
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3267
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [129] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) 3268
SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled 3269
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [130] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3270
“Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use 3271
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” 3272
in Ref. [131] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in 3273
Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [132] by Henry 3274
Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3275
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3276
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [133] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic 3277
Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 3278
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [144] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of 3279
Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on 3280
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in 3281
Ref. [145] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–145], there are some endeavors to formalize 3282
the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3283
SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books at [146–196]. 3284
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3285
proposed as book in Ref. [195] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3286
Scholar and has more than 4048 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3287
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3288
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3289
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3290
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3291
proposed as book in Ref. [196] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3292
Scholar and has more than 5046 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3293
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3294
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3295
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3296
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3297
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3298
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3299
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3300
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3301
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–145] 3302
alongside scientific research books at [146–196]. Two popular scientific research books 3303
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4048 and 5046 respectively, on neutrosophic 3304
science is on [195, 196]. 3305
References 3306
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3307
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3308
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3309
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3310
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3311
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3312
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3313
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3314
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3315
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3316
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3317
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3318
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3319
4. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3320
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3321
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3322
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3323
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3324
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3325
5. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3326
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3327
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3328
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3329
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3330
6. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3331
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3332
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3333
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3334
7. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3335
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3336
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3337
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3338
8. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3339
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3340
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3341
9. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3342
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3343
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3344
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3345
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3346
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3347
10. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3348
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3349
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3350
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3351
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3352
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3353
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3354
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3355
12. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3356
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3357
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3358
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3359
13. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3360
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3361
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3362
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3363
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3364
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3365
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3366
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3367
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3368
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3369
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3370
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3371
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3372
17. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3373
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3374
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3376
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3380
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3381
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3382
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3383
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3384
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3385
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3386
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3387
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3388
21. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3389
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3390
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3391
22. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3392
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3393
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3394
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3395
23. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3396
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3397
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3398
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3399
24. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3400
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3401
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11770.98247). 3402
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3403
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3404
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12400.12808). 3405
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3407
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3408
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3409
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3410
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, 3413
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3415
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3416
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3417
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3419
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3421
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3422
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3425
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3426
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3428
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3431
35. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3433
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3435
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3437
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3439
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3440
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3443
39. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3445
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3446
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3449
41. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3451
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3453
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3455
43. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3457
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3458
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3461
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3462
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3464
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3467
47. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3469
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3471
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3473
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3474
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3476
50. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3478
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3480
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3482
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3483
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3484
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3485
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3486
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3488
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3489
54. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3490
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3491
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3494
56. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3496
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3497
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super 3500
Returns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31147.52003). 3501
58. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3502
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3503
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3506
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3508
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3510
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3512
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3513
62. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3514
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3515
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3518
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3519
64. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3520
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3521
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3524
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3525
66. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3526
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3527
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3530
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3531
68. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3532
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3533
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3536
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3537
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3538
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3539
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3542
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3543
72. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3544
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3545
73. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3547
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3548
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3551
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3552
75. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3553
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3554
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3557
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3558
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3559
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3560
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3563
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3565
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3566
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super 3569
Infections”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19360.87048). 3570
81. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3571
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3572
82. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3574
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3575
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super 3578
Vacancy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19911.37285). 3579
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3581
85. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3583
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3584
86. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3586
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3587
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3589
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3590
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3591
88. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3592
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3593
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3594
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3595
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3596
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3598
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3599
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3600
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3601
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3602
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3603
92. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3604
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3605
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3606
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3607
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3610
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3611
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3614
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3615
95. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3616
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3618
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3619
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3622
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3623
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3626
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3627
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3628
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3629
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3630
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3631
99. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3632
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3633
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3634
100. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3635
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3636
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3637
101. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3638
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper 3639
Extensions of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3640
102. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3641
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3642
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3643
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3644
103. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3645
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3646
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3647
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3648
104. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3649
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3650
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3651
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, 3652
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3653
105. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3654
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3655
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3656
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3657
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3658
106. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3659
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3660
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3661
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3662
107. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3663
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3664
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3665
108. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3666
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3667
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3669
109. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3670
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3671
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3672
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3673
110. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3674
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3675
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3676
111. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3677
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3678
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3679
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3680
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3681
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3682
112. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3683
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3684
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3685
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3686
113. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3687
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3688
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3689
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3690
114. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3691
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3692
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3693
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3694
115. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3695
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3696
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3697
116. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3698
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3699
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3700
117. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3702
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3704
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3705
118. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3706
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3707
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3708
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3709
119. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3710
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3712
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3713
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3715
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3716
121. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3717
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3718
122. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3720
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3721
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3722
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3727
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3731
125. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3732
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3733
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3734
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3735
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3738
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3740
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3741
128. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3742
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3743
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3746
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3747
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3749
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3750
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3753
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3754
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3756
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3757
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3760
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3761
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3763
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3764
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3766
136. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3768
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3771
137. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3773
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3776
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3783
140. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3784
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3785
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3786
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3787
141. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3788
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3789
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3790
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3791
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3794
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3795
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3798
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3799
144. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3800
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3801
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3802
145. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3803
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3804
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3805
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3806
146. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3807
2023. 3808
147. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3809
Garrett, 2023. 3810
148. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3811
149. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3812
2023. 3813
150. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3814
Garrett, 2023. 3815
151. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3816
152. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3817
2023. 3818
153. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3819
Garrett, 2023. 3820
154. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3821
155. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3822
2023. 3823
156. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3824
Garrett, 2023. 3825
157. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3826
158. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3827
159. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3828
160. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3829
2023. 3830
161. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3831
Garrett, 2023. 3832
162. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3833
2023. 3834
163. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3835
164. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3836
2023. 3837
165. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3838
2023. 3839
166. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3840
2023. 3841
167. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3842
168. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3843
169. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3844
170. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3845
171. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3846
172. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3847
173. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3848
174. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3849
175. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3850
176. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3851
177. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3852
178. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3853
179. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3854
180. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3855
181. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3856
182. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3857
183. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3858
184. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3859
185. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3860
186. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3861
187. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3862
2023. 3863
188. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3864
189. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3865
190. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3866
191. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3867
192. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3868
193. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3869
194. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3870
195. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3871
196. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023. 3872
View publication stats

New Ideas in Cancer's Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous

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 Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous

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 · March 2023

394 PUBLICATIONS 7,617 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

Number Graphs And Numbers View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On 3

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperTrace-Cut). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 10

Trace-Cut pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11

V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 13

e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 14

∀Ea ∈ P : P is a SuperHyperPath and it has all SuperHyperVertices;

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 15

e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 16

∀Ea ∈ P : P is a SuperHyperPath and it has all SuperHyperVertices;

and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17

v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18

v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 19

∀Va ∈ Ea ∈ P : P is a SuperHyperPath and it has all SuperHyperVertices;

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 20

v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut criteria holds 21

∀Va ∈ Ea ∈ P : P is a SuperHyperPath and it has all SuperHyperVertices;

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22

SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 23

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and 24

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTrace-Cut). 25

Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 26

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 27

Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 28

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and 29

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 30

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 31

SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the 32

conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 33

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut; a 34

Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 35

e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic 36

v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and C(N SHG) for 37

a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 38

cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 39

of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 40

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 41

SuperHyperTrace-Cut; an Extreme SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 42

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 43

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 44

C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 45

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 46

number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an 47

Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 48

SuperHyperTrace-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 50

coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTrace-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 51

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, 52

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTrace-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTrace-Cut and 53

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 54

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 55

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 56

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 57