New Ideas On Super Nebulous by Hyper Nebbish of Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/369754679
New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of Hamiltonian-Cycle-

Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph
Preprint · April 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7796354
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
420 PUBLICATIONS 9,786 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 03 April 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA
New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 2
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With 3
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10
is a Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 14
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
a SuperHyperCycle and it has
the maximum number of SuperHyperVertices;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 16
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 19
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 21
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23
e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 24
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). 26
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 27
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 28
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 32
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 33
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive 34
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; a Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 40
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 41
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 42
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 43
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 44
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 45
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 46
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 47
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 48
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 49
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 50
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an 51
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 52
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 53
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 54
coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 55
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 56
re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 57
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 58
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 59
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 60
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 61
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 62
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 63
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic power is 64
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme 65
V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 66
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 69
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 70
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive 71
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 72
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; a Neutrosophic 73
V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 74
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 78
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 79
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; an Extreme V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 82
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 83
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 84
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 85
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 86
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an 88
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 89
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 90
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 91
coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 92
re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 94
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 95
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 96
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 97
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 98
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 99
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 100
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic power is 101
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is 102
introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and 103
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Two different types of 104
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 105
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 106
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 107
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 108
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 109
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 110
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 111
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 112
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 113
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 114
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 115
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 116
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 117
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 118
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 119
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 120
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 121
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 122
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 123
δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 124
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 125
(Neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 126
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 127
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 128
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is 129
a maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 130
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 131
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 132
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 133
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 134
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 135
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 136
version of a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor . Since there’s more ways to get 137
type-results to make a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor more understandable. For the 138
sake of having Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a need to “redefine” 139
the notion of a “SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 140
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 141
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 142
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 143
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values 144
of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The 145
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & 146
The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 147
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of 148
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 149
“The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get 150
structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of 151
SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor . It’s the main. It’ll be 152
disciplinary to have the foundation of previous definition in the kind of 153
SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor until the 154
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then it’s officially called a 155
“SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” but otherwise, it isn’t a 156
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor . There are some instances about the clarifications for 157
the main definition titled a “SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ”. These two examples get 158
more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of 159
the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor . For the sake of 160
having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a need to “redefine” the 161
notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” and a “Neutrosophic 162
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 163
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 164
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic 165
SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended 166
Table holds. And a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor are redefined to a “Neutrosophic 167
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define 168
“Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get 169
Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 170
more understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 171
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 172
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 173
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 174
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”, “Neutrosophic 175
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 176
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 177
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” 178
where it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the 179
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices 180
from a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor .] SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor . A graph is 181
a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 182
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 183
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 184
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 185
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 186
given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 187
amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 188
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 189
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s 190
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these 191
SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 192
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 193
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 194
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 195
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 196
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 197
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 198
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 199
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 200
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 201
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 202
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 203
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 204
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 205
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 206
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 207
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 208
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 209
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 210
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 211
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 212
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 213
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic 214
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 215
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 216
either the longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor or the strongest 217
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the 218
longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, called SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and the 219
strongest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, called Neutrosophic 220
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 221
SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s 222
not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style 223
of a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. There isn’t any formation of any 224
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 225
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 226
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor theory, 227
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 228
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 229
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 230
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 231
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 232
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 233
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 234
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 235
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 236
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 237
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 238
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 239
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 240
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 241
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 242
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 243
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 244
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 245
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 246
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 247
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 248
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 249
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 250
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 251
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 252
called “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 253
to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 254
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 255
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 256
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 257
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 258
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 259
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 260
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 261
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 262
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 263
formally called “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and 264
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 265
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in 266
the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 267
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 268
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 269
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 270
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 271
Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 272
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 273
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 274
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an 275
Extreme SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 276
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 277
either the optimal SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor or the Extreme 278
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general 279
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme 280
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 281
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 282
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. There isn’t any formation of any 283
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 284
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 285
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 286
find the “ amount of SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” of either individual of cells or the 287
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 288
of SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 289
group of cells? 290
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 291
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 292
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 293
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 294
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” and “Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” on 295
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken 296
more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this 297
SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 298
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 299
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 300
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 301
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 302
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 303
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are 304
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 305
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 306
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 307
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 308
and Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, are figured out in sections “ 309
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” and “Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”. In 310
the sense of tackling on getting results and in Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor to make sense about 311
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Extreme 312
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 313
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 314
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back 315
to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 316
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Extreme 317
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 318
Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 319
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 320
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 321
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 322
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”, 323
“Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 324
“Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 325
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 326
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 327
presented in section, “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”. The keyword of this research 328
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 329
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 330
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 331
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 332
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 333
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 334
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 335
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 336
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 337
3 Extreme Preliminaries Of This Scientific 338
Research On the Redeemed Ways 339
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 340
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [162],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 341
Set](Ref. [162],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 342
(NSHG)](Ref. [162],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 343
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [162],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [162], 344
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 345
(NSHG)](Ref. [162],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 346
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [162],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 347
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [162],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 348
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [162]. 349
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 350
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 351
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [162],Definition 2.1,p.1). 352
Let X be a Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 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 353
+
]− 0, 1 [. 354
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [162],Definition 2.2,p.2). 355
Let X be a Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 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. [162],Definition 356
2.5,p.2). 357
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 358
pair S = (V, E), where 359
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 360
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 361
1, 2, . . . , n); 362
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 363
V; 364
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 365
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 366
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 367
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 368
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 369
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 370
(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 . 371
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 372
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 373
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 374
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 375
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 376
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 377
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 378
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 379
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 380
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 381
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 382
(Ref. [162],Definition 2.7,p.3). 383
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 384
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 385
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 386
characterized as follow-up items. 387
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 388
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 389
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 390
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 391
HyperEdge; 392
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 393
SuperEdge; 394
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 395
SuperHyperEdge. 396
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 397
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 398
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [162], Definition 2.7, p.3). 399
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 400
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 401
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 402
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 403
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 404
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 405
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)). 406
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 407
pair S = (V, E), where 408
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 409
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 410
1, 2, . . . , n); 411
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 412
V; 413
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 414
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 415
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 416
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 417
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 418
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 419
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 420
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 421
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 422
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 423
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 424
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 425
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 426
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 427
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 428
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 429
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 430
(Ref. [162],Definition 2.7,p.3). 431
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 432
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 433
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 434
characterized as follow-up items. 435
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 436
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 437
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 438
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 439
HyperEdge; 440
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 441
SuperEdge; 442
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 443
SuperHyperEdge. 444
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 445
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 446
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 447
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 448
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 449
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 450
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 451
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 452
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 453
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 454
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 455
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 456
given SuperHyperEdges; 457
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 458
SuperHyperEdges; 459
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 460
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 461
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 462
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 463
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 464
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 465
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 466
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 467
common SuperVertex. 468
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 469
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 470
of following conditions hold: 471
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 476
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 477
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 478
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 479
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 480
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 481
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 482
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. 483
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 484
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 485
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 486
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 487
SuperHyperPath . 488
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 489
(Ref. [162],Definition 5.3,p.7). 490
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 491
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 492
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 493
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 494
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 495
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 496
(NSHE)). (Ref. [162],Definition 5.4,p.7). 497
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 498
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 499
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 500
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 501
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 502
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 503
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 504
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 506
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 507
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 509
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 510
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 511
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 512
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 513
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). 514
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 516
either V 0 or E 0 is called 517
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression 518
is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 519
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression 520
is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 521
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 522
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression 523
is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 524
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following 525
expression is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 526
criteria holds 527
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 528
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 529
e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 530
re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 531
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 532
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 533
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). 534
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 536
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 537
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 541
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 542
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 543
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 544
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 545
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 546
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of 547
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 548
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 552
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 553
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 556
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 557
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 562
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 563
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 564
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 565
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded 567
to its Extreme coefficient; 568
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 569
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 570
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 575
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 576
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 577
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 578
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 579
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the 580
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 581
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 582
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 587
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 588
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 589
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 591
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of 592
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 593
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 597
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 598
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial 602
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 603
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 607
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 608
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 609
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 610
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded 612
to its Extreme coefficient; 613
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 614
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 615
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 620
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 621
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 622
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 623
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 624
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the 625
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 626
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). 627
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 628
(i) an δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 629
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor such that either of the following expressions hold 630
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 631
|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 632
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 633
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind 634
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor such that either of the following 635
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 636
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 637
|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. 638
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 639
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 640
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a 641
need to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 642
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 643
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 644
assign to the values. 645
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 646
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 647
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 648
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 649
understandable. 650
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)
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 651
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 652
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 653
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 654
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 655
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 656
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 657
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 658
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 659
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 660
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor more Neutrosophicly understandable. 661
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a 662
need to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic 663
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 664
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 665
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 666
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. It’s redefined a 667
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the Table (3) holds. 668

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
4 Extreme SuperHyper But As The

Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 669
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 670
Forms 671
Definition 4.1. (Extreme event). 672
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 673
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Any Extreme k-subset of A of V is 674
called Extreme k-event and if k = 2, then Extreme subset of A of V is called 675
Extreme event. The following expression is called Extreme probability of A. 676
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Extreme Independent). 677
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. s Extreme k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 679
Extreme s-independent if the following expression is called Extreme 680
s-independent criteria 681
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Extreme k-events of A and B is called Extreme independent. 682
The following expression is called Extreme independent criteria 683
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Extreme Variable). 684
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Any k-function Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 686
like E is called Extreme k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function 687
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor like E is called Extreme Variable. 688
The notion of independent on Extreme Variable is likewise. 689
Definition 4.4. (Extreme Expectation). 690
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. an Extreme k-Variable E has a number 692
is called Extreme Expectation if the following expression is called Extreme 693
Expectation criteria 694
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Extreme Crossing). 695
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. an Extreme number is called Extreme 697
Crossing if the following expression is called Extreme Crossing criteria 698
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 699
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let m and n propose special 700
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then with m ≥ 4n, 701
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be an Extreme 702
random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G Extreme 703
independently with probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] and 704
H := G[S]. 705
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Extreme number of

SuperHyperVertices, Y the Extreme number of SuperHyperEdges, and Z the Extreme
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 Extreme 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: 706
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
707
Theorem 4.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 708
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 709
points in the plane, and let l be the Extreme number of SuperHyperLines √ in the plane 710
passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 711
Proof. Form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet 712
P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive points on the 713
SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This Extreme 714
SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Extreme crossing at most l 715
choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , or 716
3
l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and again 717
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 718
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 720
points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 721
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 722
Proof. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 723
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 724
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Extreme number of 725

P n−1
these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then i = 0 ni = n 726
and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph H with

P
727
SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs 728
between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints on the SuperHyperCircles that pass 729
through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 730
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 731
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 732
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with 733
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 734
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 735
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 736
4/3 4/3
by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n + n < 5n . 737
Proposition 4.9. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 738
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let X be a 739
nonnegative Extreme Variable and t a positive real number. Then 740
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. 741
Corollary 4.10. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 742
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let Xn be a 743
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. 744
If E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 745
Proof. 746
Theorem 4.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 747
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. A special 748
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 749
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is 751
up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of 752
G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 753
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 754
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph G. 755
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 756
the indicator Extreme Variable for this Extreme Event. By equation, we have 757
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 758
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 759
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: 760
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 761
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 762
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 763
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 764
n → ∞. Consequently, an Extreme SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability 765
number at most k. 766
Definition 4.12. (Extreme Variance). 767
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. an Extreme k-Variable E has a number 769
is called Extreme Variance if the following expression is called Extreme Variance 770
criteria 771
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let X be an 773
Extreme Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 774
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let X be an Extreme Variable and let 776
t be a positive real number. Then 777
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ 2
= .
t t2
778
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let Xn be an 780
Extreme Variable in a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 781
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 782
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 784
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 785
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 786
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, 788
set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for which f (k) is 789
less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 790
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 792
result is straightforward. 793
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and 795
let f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 796
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 797
or 798
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 799
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 801
Definition 4.17. (Extreme Threshold). 802
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let P be a monotone property of 804
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 805
Extreme Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 806
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 807
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 808
Definition 4.18. (Extreme Balanced). 809
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let F be a fixed Extreme 811
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 812
copy of F as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph is called Extreme Balanced. 813
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let F be a 815
nonempty balanced Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 816
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 817
as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph. 818
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 820
Example 4.20. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E) 821
in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 822
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 823
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 824
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 825
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 826
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 827
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 828
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 829
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 830
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 831
C(N SHG)Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
Figure 1. The Extreme SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Extreme Notions of

Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.3)
832
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 835
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 836
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 837
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 838
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 839
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme 840
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 841

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + z 3 + z.
842

straightforward. 845

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
846

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
850




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
854

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
858


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
862

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



866

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
870

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

874

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
878

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

882

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
886

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



890

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
894


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
898

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
902




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
906

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
910


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
914

= {E1 , E2 }.
= z 10 + z 2 .
= {VE2 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + 7z.
918




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
922
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 923
The all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 924
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 925
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 926
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 927
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 928
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph 929
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only 930
the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside of 931
any given Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to 932
some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Extreme 933
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in 934
an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some 935
of them but not all of them. 936
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If

an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then
the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is at 937
least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 938
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In other 939
words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum 940
Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme 941
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme 942
SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, 943
has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are contained in an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 944
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Then
the Extreme number of type-result-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor has, the least Extreme cardinality,
the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality, is the Extreme 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 an Extreme type-result-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor with the least Extreme cardinality, 945
the lower sharp Extreme bound for cardinality. 946
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph 947
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 948
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is an Extreme type-result-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the 949
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme type-result-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is the 950
cardinality of 951
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Proof. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {z} isn’t a
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor since neither amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges nor
amount of SuperHyperVertices where amount refers to the Extreme number of
SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges) more than one to form any kind of
SuperHyperEdges or any number of SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the Extreme
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 Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices has the eligibilities to

propose property such that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme
SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme
SuperHyperVertices but the maximum Extreme cardinality indicates that these

Extreme type-SuperHyperSets couldn’t give us the Extreme lower bound in the term of
Extreme sharpness. In other words, the Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperVertices implies at least on-quasi-triangle style is up but

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

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph
ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the generality of the
connected loopless Extreme 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-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp

bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is the cardinality of
Then we’ve lost some connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the connected
loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and their
quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor.
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 952
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 953
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 954
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 955
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the Extreme 956
SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to be applied. 957
Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main definition but by 958
the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 959
The Extreme structure of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor decorates the Extreme

SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Extreme connections so as this Extreme
style implies different versions of Extreme SuperHyperEdges with the maximum
Extreme cardinality in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The
lower Extreme bound is to have the maximum Extreme groups of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have perfect Extreme connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges
and the outside of this Extreme SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the
connectedness of the used Extreme SuperHyperGraph arising from its Extreme
properties taken from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Extreme
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Extreme SuperHyperSet, then there’s no Extreme
connection. Furthermore, the Extreme existence of one Extreme SuperHyperVertex has
no Extreme effect to talk about the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since at least two
Extreme SuperHyperVertices involve to make a title in the Extreme background of the
Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The Extreme SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no
Extreme SuperHyperEdge but at least two Extreme SuperHyperVertices make the
Extreme version of Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Extreme setting of
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is used as Extreme
adjective for the initial Extreme SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no Extreme
appearance of the loop Extreme version of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge and this
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The Extreme adjective “loop” on the
basic Extreme framework engages one Extreme SuperHyperVertex but it never happens
in this Extreme setting. With these Extreme bases, on an Extreme SuperHyperGraph,
there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at least an Extreme
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor has the Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge.
Thus, an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor has the Extreme cardinality at least an
Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This
Extreme SuperHyperSet isn’t an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor since either the
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is an obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel thus it never
happens since there’s no Extreme usage of this Extreme framework and even more
there’s no Extreme connection inside or the Extreme SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious
and as its consequences, there’s an Extreme contradiction with the term “Extreme
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” since the maximum Extreme cardinality never happens for this
Extreme style of the Extreme SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no Extreme
connection inside as mentioned in first Extreme case in the forms of drawback for this
selected Extreme SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Extreme case implies having the Extreme style of on-quasi-triangle
Extreme style on the every Extreme elements of this Extreme SuperHyperSet. Precisely,
the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices such that some Extreme amount of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle Extreme style. The Extreme cardinality of the
v SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Extreme SuperHyperSet

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

distinct-covers-order-amount Extreme SuperHyperEdges for amount of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices taken from the Extreme SuperHyperSet
It means that the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices
Is an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph as used 960
Extreme background in the Extreme terms of worst Extreme case and the common 961
theme of the lower Extreme bound occurred in the specific Extreme SuperHyperClasses 962
of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are Extreme free-quasi-triangle. 963
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme number of

the Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Then every Extreme SuperHyperVertex has at least
no Extreme SuperHyperEdge with others in common. Thus those Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have the eligibles to be contained in an Extreme
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Those Extreme SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in
an Extreme style-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Formally, consider
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
Are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 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
Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperVertices and there’s only and only
one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) between the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices Zi and Zj . The other definition for the Extreme SuperHyperEdge
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) in the terms of Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor but
with slightly differences in the maximum Extreme cardinality amid those Extreme
type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus the Extreme
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Extreme cardinality ,

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let

E
Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to the
Extreme 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, 964
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
965
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Extreme intended
SuperHyperVertices but in an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
could be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Extreme
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 966
is at least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 967
Extreme SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme 968
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Extreme 969
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Extreme number of Extreme 970
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in some cases but the 971
maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme 972
number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 973
contained in an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 974
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Extreme SuperHyperEdges. But the 975
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel addresses 976
some issues about the Extreme optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially delivers some 977
remarks on the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that 978
there’s distinct amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Extreme 979
SuperHyperVertices up to all taken from that Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 980
SuperHyperVertices but this Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 981
SuperHyperVertices is either has the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality or it 982
doesn’t have maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious 983
SuperHyperModel, there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge containing at least all 984
Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 985
where the Extreme completion of the Extreme incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 986
literarily, an Extreme embedded R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The SuperHyperNotions of 987
embedded SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, 988
these types of SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum 989
SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the embedded setting is elected such that those 990
SuperHyperSets have the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality and they’re 991
Extreme SuperHyperOptimal. The less than two distinct types of Extreme 992
SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum Extreme style of the embedded 993
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The interior types of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 994
are deciders. Since the Extreme number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by 995
the interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and 996
more formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Extreme SuperHyperSet for any 997
distinct types of Extreme SuperHyperVertices pose the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 998
Thus Extreme exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Extreme 999
SuperHyperEdge and in Extreme SuperHyperRelation with the interior Extreme 1000
SuperHyperVertices in that Extreme SuperHyperEdge. In the embedded Extreme 1001
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s the usage of exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices since 1002
they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more 1003
relevant than the title “interior”. One Extreme SuperHyperVertex has no connection, 1004
inside. Thus, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices with one 1005
SuperHyperElement has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case 1006
implying the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor with 1007
the exclusion of the exclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme 1008
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor with the 1009
inclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, is an 1010
Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 1011
Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge 1012
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme 1013
SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor minus all 1014
Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, 1015
there’s only an unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two 1016
distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 1017
minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1018
The main definition of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor has two titles. an 1019
Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and its corresponded quasi-maximum Extreme 1020
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any Extreme 1021
number, there’s an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor with that quasi-maximum 1022
Extreme SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded Extreme 1023
SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Extreme SuperHyperGraph, then the 1024
Extreme quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the collection of all the Extreme 1025
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbors for all Extreme numbers less than its Extreme 1026
corresponded maximum number. The essence of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ends 1027
up but this essence starts up in the terms of the Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 1028
again and more in the operations of collecting all the Extreme 1029
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbors acted on the all possible used formations of the Extreme 1030
SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Extreme number. This Extreme number is 1031
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbors. 1032
Let zExtreme Number , SExtreme SuperHyperSet and GExtreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor be an 1033
Extreme number, an Extreme SuperHyperSet and an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1034
Then 1035
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class = {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |

SExtreme SuperHyperSet = GExtreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ,
|SExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1036
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1037
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =

∪zExtreme Number {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1038
technical definition for the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1039
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor =
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |
= max zExtreme Number }.
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Extreme 1040
poses the upcoming expressions.

{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1042
= max zExtreme Number
[zExtreme
Number ]Extreme Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1043

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1044


1045
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1046

1047

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, “Extreme 1048
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the Extreme 1049
SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 1050
incident to an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, another name for “Extreme 1051
Quasi-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of “Extreme 1052
Quasi-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” since “Extreme Quasi-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” happens 1053
“Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework 1054
and background but “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Extreme 1055
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1056
preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the Extreme 1057
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Extreme 1058
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Extreme Quasi-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor”, and “Extreme 1059
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” are up. 1060
Thus, let zExtreme Number , NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1061
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor be an Extreme number, an Extreme 1062
SuperHyperNeighborhood and an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and the new terms are 1063
up. 1064

∪zExtreme Number {NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |Extreme Cardinality
1065
{NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
|NExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number |
1066
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
1067
And with go back to initial structure, 1068


1069
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1070

1071

Thus, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1072
Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if for 1073
any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, some interior 1074
Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors with no 1075
Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of 1076
them. 1077
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1078
are coming up. 1079
The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices is the simple

Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor.
The Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The

Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1080
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1081
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme

SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge amid some
Extreme SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is
related to the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex inside the intended Extreme
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is up. The obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is an
Extreme SuperHyperSet includes only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex. But the
Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
doesn’t have less than two SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far an SuperHyperEdge. Thus the
non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor
is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme

R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1082
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1083
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1084
instead of all given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme 1085
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and it’s an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since it’s 1086
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of

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

Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, not:
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1087
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1088
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1089
Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1090
“Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” 1091
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1092
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 1093
is only and only
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only an Extreme free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and an Extreme on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also
it’s an Extreme stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor amid those
obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, are
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1094
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower

sharp bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is the cardinality
of
To sum them up, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The 1095
all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 1096
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 1097
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 1098
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 1099
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1100
Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let an Extreme 1101
SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Extreme SuperHyperVertices r. 1102
Consider all Extreme numbers of those Extreme SuperHyperVertices from that Extreme 1103
SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more than r distinct Extreme 1104
SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1105
SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor with the least 1106
cardinality, the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality. Assume a 1107
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1108
the Extreme SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of the 1109
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1110
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t an Extreme 1111
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since it doesn’t have 1112
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 1113
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1114
some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1115
SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 1116
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices but it isn’t an Extreme 1117
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since it doesn’t do the Extreme procedure such that such that 1118
there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1119
uniquely [there are at least one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, 1120
sometimes in the connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), an Extreme 1121
SuperHyperVertex, titled its Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Extreme 1122
SuperHyperVertex in the Extreme SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Extreme 1123
procedure”.]. There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside the intended 1124
Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Extreme 1125
SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the obvious Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, VESHE is 1126
up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1127
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, VESHE , is an Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only 1128
all Extreme SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Extreme pairs are titled 1129
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1130
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1131
VESHE , is the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality of an Extreme 1132
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme 1133
SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely. Thus, in a 1134
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any Extreme 1135
R-Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor only contains all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices and all 1136
exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices from the unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge where 1137
there’s any of them has all possible Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all 1138
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with no exception minus all Extreme 1139
SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of them but everything is possible about 1140
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods and Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1141
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, is up. There’s neither empty 1142
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1143
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple Extreme 1144
type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The Extreme SuperHyperSet 1145
of Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1146
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor

|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = az s + bz t .
is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The 1147
Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1148

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1149
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1150
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1152
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1153
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There are not only two Extreme 1154
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet. Thus the 1155
non-obvious Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is up. The obvious simple Extreme 1156
type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is an Extreme 1157
SuperHyperSet includes only two Extreme SuperHyperVertices. But the Extreme 1158
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1159

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme 1160
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the 1161
Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1162
the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1163

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1164
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1165
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1166

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1167
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1168
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1169
given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 1170
and it’s an Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since it’s 1171
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1173
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1174
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There aren’t only less than three 1175
Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet, 1176

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Thus the non-obvious Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor , 1177

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1178
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, not: 1179

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not: 1180

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1181
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1182
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1183
“Extreme Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor ” 1184
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1185
Extreme ,
is only and only 1187

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1188
5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 1189
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1190
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 1191
SuperHyperClasses. 1192
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 1193

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1194
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1195
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 Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1196
There’s a new way to redefine as 1197
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 1198
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The 1199
latter is straightforward. 1200
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 1201
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 1202
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1203
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1204
Then 1205

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Figure 23. an Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.5)
1206
Proof. Let 1207
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1208
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 Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1209

Figure 24. an Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.7)
Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 1214
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 1215
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1216
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1217

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1218
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1219
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 1220
Figure 25. an Extreme SuperHyperStar Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.9)
a new way to redefine as 1221

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 1225
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 1226
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 1227
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 1228
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1229
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1230
Then 1231

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1232
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
1233
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1234

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1238
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1239
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1240
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1241
the 1242
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor taken from a connected Extreme 1243
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1244
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 1245
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1246
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 1247
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1248
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 1249
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1250
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 1251
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1252
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.11)
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1253
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1254

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1255
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
1256
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 1258

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1261
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1262
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1263
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1264
the 1265
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1266
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1267
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1270
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1271
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 1272
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 1273
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1274
ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme 1275
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1277
Then, 1278

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {CEN T ER}.
= za.
Proof. Let 1279
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
Figure 27. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.13)
1280
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1282

latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1285
Thus the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1286
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. The unique embedded 1287
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor proposes some longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 1288
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1289
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1290
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 1291
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1292
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 1293
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1294
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1295
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1296
For the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and the 1297
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. 1298
Figure 28. an Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.15)
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is “redefined” 1299
on the positions of the alphabets. 1300
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1301
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian − Cycle − N eighbor =

{theSuperHyperHamiltonian − Cycle − N eighborof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperHamiltonian − Cycle − N eighbor
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperHamiltonian−Cycle−N eighbor. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 1302
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1303
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1304
Corollary 6.3. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 1305
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and 1306
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor coincide. 1307
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is an 1309
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if and only if it’s a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1310
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1312
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1313
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1314
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1315
its SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and reversely. 1316
Corollary 6.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 1317
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1318
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 1319
is its SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and reversely. 1320
Corollary 6.8. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1321
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1322
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1323
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1324
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1325
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1328
Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1329
Corollary 6.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1331
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1332
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined. 1333
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1334
its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1335
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1338
Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1339
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1341
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1342
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1343
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1344
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1345
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1346
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1347
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1348
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1349
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1350
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1351
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1352
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1353
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1354
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1355
independent SuperHyperSet is 1356
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1357
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1358
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1359
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1360
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1361
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1362
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1363
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then V is 1364
a maximal 1365
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1366
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1367
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1368
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1369
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1370
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1371
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1372
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1373
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1374
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1375
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1376
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1377
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1378
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1379
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1380
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1381
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1383
number of 1384
(i) : the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1385
(ii) : the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1386
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1387
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1388
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1389
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1390
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1391
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1392
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1394
(i) : the dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1395
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1396
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1397
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1398
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1399
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1400
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1401
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1404
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1405
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1406
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1407
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1411
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1412
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1413
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1416
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1417
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1418
is a 1419
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1423
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1424
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1425
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1428
number of 1429
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1433
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1434
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1435
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1436
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1437
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1438
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1440
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1441
(iv) : SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1445
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1446
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1447
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1448
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1449
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1450
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1451
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1452
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1456
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1458
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1459
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1460
setting of dual 1461
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1465
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1466
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1467
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1469
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1471
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1472
dual 1473
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1477
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1478
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1479
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1481
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1482
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1483
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1489
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1490
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1491
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1492
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1493
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1494
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1495
that 1496
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1497
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1498
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1499
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then 1500
(i) S is SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor set; 1501
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1502
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1503
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1504
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1505
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1506
connected. Then 1507
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1508
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1509
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1510
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1511
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1513
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1514
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1515
a dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1516
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1517
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1518
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1520
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1521
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1522
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1523
dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1524
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1525
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1526
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1528
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1529
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1530
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1531
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1533
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1534
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1536
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1537
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1538
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1540
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1541
(ii) Γ = 1; 1542
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1543
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1544
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1546
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1547
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1548
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1549
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1550
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1551
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1552
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1553
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1554
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1556
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1557
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1558
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1560
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1561
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1563

bnc ; 1564
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1565
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1567
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1568
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1569
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF; 1570
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1571
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1572
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1573
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1574
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1575
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1576
SuperHyperSet. Then 1577
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1578
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF; 1579
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1580

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1581
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1582
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1584
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1585
SuperHyperSet. Then 1586
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1587
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E); 1588
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1589

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1590
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only dual maximal 1591
following statements hold; 1594
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1595
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is an 1596
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1597
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1598
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1599
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1600
following statements hold; 1602
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1603
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is an 1604
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1605
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1606
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1607
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1608
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1609
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1610
hold; 1611
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1612
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1613
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1614
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1616
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1618
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1619
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1620
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1621
hold; 1622
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1623
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1625
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1627
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1629
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1630
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1632
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1633
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1634
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1636
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1638
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1641
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1643
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1644
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1645
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1647
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1649
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1650
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1652
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1654
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1655
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1656
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1658
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1660
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1663
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1665
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1666
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1667
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1669
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1671
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1674
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1675
Recognition 1676
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1677
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease is 1678
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1679
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1680
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some Extreme 1681
treatments for this Extreme disease. 1682
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1683
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1684
long-term Extreme function. 1685
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme model 1686
[it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the move 1687
from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer 1688
hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and 1689
neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this event 1690
leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to 1691
have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1692
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1693
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1694
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1695
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an Extreme 1696
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 1697
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1698
find either the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor or the Extreme 1699
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1700
Figure 29. an Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperBipartite
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1701
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1702
SuperHyperModel 1703
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1704
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1705
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1706
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1707
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1708
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1709
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1710
the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1711
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1712
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1713
SuperHyperModel 1714
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1715
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1716
Figure 30. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1717
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1718
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous result, 1719
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1720
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1721
is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1722
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1723
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1724
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1725
The SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor are 1726
defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1727
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1728
recognitions? 1729
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1730
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor? 1731
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1732
compute them? 1733
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1734
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor? 1735
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme 1736
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1737
they’re based on SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, are there else? 1738
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1739
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1740
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1741
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1742
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1743
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1744
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1745
highlighted. 1746
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1747
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1748
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition 1749
of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1750
the new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1751
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, finds the convenient background to implement 1752
some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme 1753
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1754
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title 1755
“Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1756
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are 1757
introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on the 1758
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. The 1759
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this 1760
research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the 1761
results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 1762
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of 1763
this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups 1764
of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1765
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1766
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1767
called “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 1768
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1769
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor
3. Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1770
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1771
12 Extreme SuperHyperDuality But As The 1772
Forms 1774
Definition 12.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperDuality). 1775
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider an 1776
Extreme SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either 1777
V 0 or E 0 is called 1778
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1779
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1780
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1781
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1782
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1783
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1784
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1785
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1786
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1787
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1788
(v) Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1789
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1790
rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1791
Definition 12.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperDuality). 1792
Extreme SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 1794
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1795
e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1796
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an 1797
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 1798
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1799
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1800
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1802
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1803
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1804
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1805
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1806
SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 1807
conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1808
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1809
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1810
Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1811
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1813
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1815
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1816
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1817
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1818
Extreme coefficient; 1819
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1820
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1830
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1837
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1838
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 1842
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 1843
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1844
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1845
of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1846
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1850
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1851
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1855
Extreme coefficient. 1864
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 1868
E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 1869
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 1870
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, 1871
E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 1872
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1874
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an Extreme 1877
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 1878
only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 1879
V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as 1880
an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in 1881
every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1882


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

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



C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1925
Then 1926
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1927
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1931
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1935
Then 1937
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Proof. Let 1938
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1946
Proposition 12.8. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1947
Then 1948
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1949
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1959
Proposition 12.10. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1960
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1961
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1962
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 1967
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1968
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1969
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1970
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1971
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1972
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1980

= {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 |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1983
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme 1984

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1990
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 2000
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 2001
Then, 2003
∗ ∗
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
Extreme Cardinality
|z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2004
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Extreme Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2005
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2006

∃!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 2011
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2012
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained 2014
Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 2015
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 2017
13 Extreme SuperHyperJoin But As The 2018
Forms 2020
Definition 13.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperJoin). 2021
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2025
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2026
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2027
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2028
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2030
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2031
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2032
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2033
(v) Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2035
re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2036
Definition 13.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperJoin). 2037
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2040
Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme 2041
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2042
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 2043
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 2044
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2045
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2046
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2047
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2049
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2053
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2054
Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2055
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2056
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2062
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2064
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2074
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2078
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2079
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2080
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2081
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2085
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2087
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2088
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2098
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. E1 2111
and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 2112
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2117
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2119
every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2125


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

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

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V5 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

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

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial =
4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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


C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 10z.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2169
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin =

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

.
Proof. Let 2170
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2174
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2178
Then 2180

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

.
Proof. Let 2181
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2189
Then 2191
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2192

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2202
C(N SHG)Extreme 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 |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2205
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 2210
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2211
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2212
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2214
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2223

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 |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2226
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2227
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2228

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2231
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2232
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2233
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2244
Then, 2246

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

.
Proof. Let 2247
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2248

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2252
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2253
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2254
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2255
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2260
14 Extreme SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2261
Forms 2263
Definition 14.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperPerfect). 2264
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2268
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2269
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2270
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2271
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2273
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2274
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2275
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2276
(v) Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2278
Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme 2279
rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2280
Definition 14.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperPerfect). 2281
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2284
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2286
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 2290
SuperHyperPerfect; 2291
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2292
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2294
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2298
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2299
Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2300
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an 2301
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2307
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2309
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2319
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2320
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2326
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2327
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2328
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2331
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2332
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2333
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2334
of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2335
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2344
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2357
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2363
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2371


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2415
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2416
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2420
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2424
Then 2426
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2427
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2435
Then 2437
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2438

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2448
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2451
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 2456
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2457
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2458
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2459
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2460
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2469

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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2472
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme 2473

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2477
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2478
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2479
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2490
Then, 2492
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2493
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2494

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2498
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2499
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2500
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2501
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2506
15 Extreme SuperHyperTotal But As The 2507
Forms 2509
Definition 15.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperTotal). 2510
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2514
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2515
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2516
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2517
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2519
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2520
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2521
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2522
(v) Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2524
Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme 2525
rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2526
Definition 15.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperTotal). 2527
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2530
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2532
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2536
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2537
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2539
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2543
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2544
Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme 2545
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2546
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2552
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2554
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2564
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2568
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2569
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2570
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2571
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2575
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2577
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2578
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2588
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2601
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2607
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2615


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

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

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

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+19i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme 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 R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

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

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 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)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+2i=011 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2659
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2660
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2664
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2668
Then 2670
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2671
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2679
Then 2681
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2682
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2692
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2695
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2700
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2701
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2704
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2713

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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2716
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2717
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2718

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2721
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2722
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2734
Then, 2736
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2737
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2738

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2742
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2743
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2744
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2745
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2750
16 Extreme SuperHyperConnected But As The 2751
Forms 2753
Definition 16.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperConnected). 2754
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2758
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2759
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2760
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2761
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2763
such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2764
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2765
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2766
(v) Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2768
e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2769
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2770
Definition 16.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperConnected). 2771
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2774
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) 2776
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2777
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2778
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2779
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2781
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2782
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2785
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2786
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2787
SuperHyperConnected; 2789
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2790
of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2791
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2793
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2798
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2800
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2801
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2810
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2814
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2815
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2817
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2818
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2822
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2823
SuperHyperConnected; 2825
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2826
either of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, 2827
Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2828
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2829
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2836
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2837
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 2849
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 2850
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 2851
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 2852
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 2853
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 2854
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 2855
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2856
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 2859
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 2860
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 2861
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 2862
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2864


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

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

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

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+19i=0 }.

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

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


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 .

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)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+2i=011 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 10z.

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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2928
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2929
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 2933
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2937
Then 2939
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2940
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )|
≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 2943
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2948
Then 2950
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2951
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2961
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2964
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2969
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2970
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2973
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2974
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2982
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2985
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2986

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2990
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2991
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 3003
Then, 3005
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3006
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 3007

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3011
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3012
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3013
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3014
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 3020
17 Background 3021
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3022
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3023
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3024
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3025
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3026
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3027
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3028
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3029
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3030
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3031
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3032
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3033
results based on initial background. 3034
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating and 3035
Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in 3036
Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3037
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3038
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3039
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3040
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3041
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3042
Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research article studies 3043
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3044
the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3045
SuperHyperNumbers. 3046
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3047
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3048
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3049
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3050
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3051
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3052
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3053
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3054
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3055
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3056
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3057
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3058
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3059
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3060
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3061
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3062
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3063
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3064
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3065
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3066
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3067
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3068
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3069
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3070
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3071
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry 3072
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3073
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3074
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3075
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3076
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3077
Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3078
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3079
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3080
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3081
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3082
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3083
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3084
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3085
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett 3086
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3087
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett 3088
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3089
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3090
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3091
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3092
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3093
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3094
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3095
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3096
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3097
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3098
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3099
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3100
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3101
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3102
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3103
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3104
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3105
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3106
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3107
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3108
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3109
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [132] by Henry 3110
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3111
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3112
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [133] by Henry Garrett 3113
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3114
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3115
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [134] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3116
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3117
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3118
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [135] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3119
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3120
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [138] by 3121
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3122
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3123
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [139] by Henry 3124
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3125
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3126
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [142] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3127
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3128
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [145] by Henry 3129
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3130
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3131
in Ref. [146] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3132
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3133
Ref. [147] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3134
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3135
Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [148] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3136
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3137
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [149] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3138
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3139
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [150] by Henry Garrett 3140
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3141
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [161] by Henry 3142
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3143
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3144
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [162] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–162], there 3145
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3146
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books at [163–257]. 3147
Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4190 and 3148
5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [258, 259]. 3149
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3150
proposed as book in Ref. [246] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3151
Scholar and has more than 4190 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3152
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3153
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 3154
theory. 3155
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3156
proposed as book in Ref. [247] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3157
Scholar and has more than 5189 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3158
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3159
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3160
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3161
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3162
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3163
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3164
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3165
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in SuperHyperGraphs 3166
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–162] alongside scientific 3167
research books at [163–257]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms 3168
of high readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [258, 259]. 3169
References 3170
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3171
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3172
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3173
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3174
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3175
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3176
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3177
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3178
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3179
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3180
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3181
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3182
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3183
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3184
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3185
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3186
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3187
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by-eulerian- 3188
super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3189
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3190
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3191
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3192
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3193
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3194
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3195
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3196
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3197
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3198
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3199
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3200
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3201
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3202
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3203
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3204
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3205
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3206
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3207
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3208
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3209
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3210
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3211
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3212
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3213
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3214
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3215
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3216
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3217
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3218
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3219
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3220
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3221
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3222
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3223
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3224
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3225
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3226
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3227
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3228
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3229
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3230
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3231
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3232
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3233
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3234
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3235
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3236
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3237
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3238
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3239
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3240
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3241
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3242
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3243
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3244
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3246
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3250
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3251
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3252
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3253
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3254
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3255
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3256
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3257
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3258
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3259
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3260
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3261
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3262
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3263
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3264
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3265
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3266
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3267
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3268
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3269
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3270
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3271
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7796334). 3272
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3274
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3275
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3277
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3278
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3279
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3280
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791982). 3281
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3283
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7790026). 3284
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3285
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3286
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3289
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3290
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3291
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3292
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3295
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7781476). 3296
34. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3297
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3298
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3301
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7777857). 3302
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3304
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3306
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3307
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3308
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3310
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3313
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3314
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3315
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3316
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3317
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3319
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3322
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3325
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3326
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3328
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3329
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3331
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3332
46. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3333
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3334
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3335
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3337
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3340
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3343
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3344
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3346
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3349
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3351
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3353
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3355
54. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3357
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3358
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3361
56. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3363
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3364
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3367
58. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3369
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3371
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3373
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3375
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3376
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3379
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3380
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3382
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3385
64. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3387
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3389
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3391
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3392
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3394
67. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3396
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3398
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3400
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3401
69. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3402
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3403
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3404
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3406
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3407
71. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3408
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3409
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3412
73. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3414
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3415
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3418
75. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3420
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3421
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3424
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3426
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3428
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3430
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3431
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3432
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3433
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3436
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3437
81. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3438
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3439
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3442
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3443
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3444
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3445
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3448
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3449
85. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3450
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3451
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3454
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3455
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3456
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3457
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3460
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3461
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3462
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3463
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3465
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3466
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3469
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3470
92. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3471
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3472
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3475
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3476
94. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3477
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3478
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3481
96. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3483
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3484
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3487
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3489
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3490
99. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3492
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3493
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3496
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3499
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3501
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3502
103. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3504
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3505
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3507
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3508
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3509
105. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3510
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3511
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3512
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3513
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3514
107. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3516
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3517
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3518
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3519
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3520
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3521
109. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3522
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3523
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3524
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3525
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3528
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3529
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3532
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3533
112. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3534
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3536
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3537
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3540
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3541
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3544
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3545
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3546
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3547
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3548
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3549
116. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3550
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3551
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3552
117. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3553
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3554
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3555
118. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3556
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3557
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3558
119. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3559
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3560
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3561
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3562
120. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3563
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3564
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3565
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3566
121. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3567
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3568
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3569
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3570
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3571
122. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3572
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3573
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3574
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3575
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3576
123. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3577
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3578
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3579
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3580
124. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3581
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3582
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3583
125. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3584
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3585
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3587
126. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3588
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3589
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3590
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3591
127. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3592
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3593
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3594
128. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3595
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3596
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3597
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3598
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3599
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3600
129. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3601
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3602
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3603
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3604
130. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3605
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3606
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3607
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3608
131. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3609
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3610
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3611
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3612
132. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3613
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3614
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3615
133. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3616
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3617
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3618
134. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3620
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3621
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3622
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3623
135. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3624
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3625
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3626
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3627
136. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3628
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3629
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3630
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3631
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3633
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3634
138. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3635
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3636
139. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3638
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3639
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3640
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3645
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3649
142. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3650
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3651
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3652
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3653
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3656
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3658
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3659
145. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3660
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3661
In Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3665
10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3666
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3668
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3669
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3672
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3673
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3675
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3676
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3679
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3680
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3682
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3683
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3685
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3690
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3691
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3695
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3696
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3699
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3702
157. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3703
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3704
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3705
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3706
158. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3707
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3708
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3709
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3710
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3713
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3714
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3717
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3718
161. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3719
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 3720
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3721
162. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3722
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3723
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3724
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3725
163. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3726
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793875). 3727
164. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3728
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7792307). 3729
165. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3730
166. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3732
167. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3734
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3735
168. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3736
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3737
169. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3738
170. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3740
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3741
171. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3742
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3743
172. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3744
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3745
173. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3746
174. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3748
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3749
175. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3750
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3751
176. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3752
177. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3754
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3755
178. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3756
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3757
179. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3758
180. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3760
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3761
181. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3762
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3763
182. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3764
183. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3766
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3767
184. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3768
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3769
185. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3770
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3771
186. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3772
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3773
187. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3774
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 3775
188. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3776
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 3777
189. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3778
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 3779
190. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3780
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 3781
191. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3782
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 3783
192. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3784
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 3785
193. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3786
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 3787
194. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3788
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 3789
195. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3790
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 3791
196. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3792
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 3793
197. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3794
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 3795
198. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3796
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 3797
199. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3798
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 3799
200. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3800
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 3801
201. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3802
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 3803
202. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3804
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 3805
203. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3806
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 3807
204. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3808
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 3809
205. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3810
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 3811
206. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3812
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 3813
207. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3814
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 3815
208. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3816
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 3817
209. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3818
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 3819
210. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3820
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 3821
211. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3822
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 3823
212. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3824
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3825
213. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3826
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3827
214. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3828
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 3829
215. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3830
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3831
216. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3832
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3833
217. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3834
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3835
218. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3836
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 3837
219. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3838
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 3839
220. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3840
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 3841
221. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3842
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3843
222. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3844
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3845
223. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3846
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3847
224. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3848
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 3849
225. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3850
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 3851
226. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3852
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3853
227. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3854
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3855
228. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3856
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3857
229. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3858
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3859
230. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3860
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 3861
231. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3862
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 3863
232. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3864
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3865
233. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3866
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3867
234. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3868
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3869
235. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3870
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3871
236. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3872
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3873
237. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3874
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3875
238. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3876
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3877
239. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3878
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3879
240. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3880
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3881
241. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3882
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3883
242. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3884
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3885
243. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3886
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3887
244. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3888
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3889
245. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3890
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3891
246. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3892
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3893
247. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3894
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3895
248. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3896
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3897
249. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3898
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3899
250. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3900
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3901
251. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3902
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3903
252. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3904
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3905
253. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3906
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3907
254. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3908
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3909
255. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3910
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3911
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3912
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 3913
257. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3914
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 3915
258. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3916
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 3917
259. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3918
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 3919
View publication stats

New Ideas On Super Nebulous by Hyper Nebbish of Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Ideas On Super Nebulous by Hyper Nebbish of Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of Hamiltonian-Cycle-

Preprint · April 2023

420 PUBLICATIONS 9,786 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 2

Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With 3

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10

is a Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 14

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 15

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 16

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

v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18

v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 19

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 20

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 21

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

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23

e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 24

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 25

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor). 26

Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 27

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 28

Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29

e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 30

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 31

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 32

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 33

of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive 34

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35

that they form the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; a Neutrosophic 36

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37

e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 38

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 39

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 40

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 41

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 42

Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 43

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 44

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 45

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 46

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 47

v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor 48

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 50

number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an 51

Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 52

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 54

coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 55

it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 56

re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor, 57

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 58

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 59

the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 60

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 61

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 62