New Ideas On Super Hammy by Hyper Hamper of Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/369825403
New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut

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

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7804218
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
422 PUBLICATIONS 9,966 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
Featured Articles View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 06 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 Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 2
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 10
S is a Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ C : C is
a SuperHyperCycle and it has
the maximum number of SuperHyperVertices;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 16
∀Ea ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 19
∀Va ∈ C : C is
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 21
∀Va ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23
e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 24
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut). 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-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut; a Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut; an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 45
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 46
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 47
v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 48
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 50
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 51
Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 52
conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 53
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the Extreme power is 54
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 55
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 60
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 61
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 62
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 63
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 64
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power is 65
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme 66
V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 67
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 71
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive 72
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 73
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; a Neutrosophic 74
V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 75
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 79
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 80
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; an Extreme V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 83
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 88
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 89
Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 90
cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 91
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 92
and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 93
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 94
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 98
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 99
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 100
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 101
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power is 103
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is 104
introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and 105
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Two different types of 106
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 107
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 108
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 109
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 110
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 111
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 112
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 113
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 114
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 115
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 116
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 117
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 118
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 119
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 120
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 121
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 122
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 123
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 124
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 125
δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 126
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 127
(Neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 128
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 129
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 130
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 131
is a maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 132
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 133
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 134
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 135
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 136
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 137
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 138
version of a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . Since there’s more ways to get 139
type-results to make a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut more understandable. For the 140
sake of having Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, there’s a need to 141
“redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices 142
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 143
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 144
Assume a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 145
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values 146
of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The 147
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & 148
The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 149
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of 150
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 151
“The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get 152
structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of 153
SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . It’s the main. It’ll be 154
disciplinary to have the foundation of previous definition in the kind of 155
SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut until the 156
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then it’s officially called a 157
“SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” but otherwise, it isn’t a 158
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . There are some instances about the clarifications for 159
the main definition titled a “SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ”. These two examples get 160
more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of 161
the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . For the sake of 162
having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, there’s a need to “redefine” the 163
notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” and a “Neutrosophic 164
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 165
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 166
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic 167
SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended 168
Table holds. And a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut are redefined to a “Neutrosophic 169
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define 170
“Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get 171
Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 172
more understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 173
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 174
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 175
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 176
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”, “Neutrosophic 177
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 178
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 179
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” 180
where it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the 181
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices 182
from a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut .] SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . A graph is 183
a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 184
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 185
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 186
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 187
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 188
given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 189
amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 190
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 191
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s 192
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these 193
SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 194
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 195
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 196
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 197
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 198
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 199
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 200
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 201
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 202
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 203
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 204
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 205
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 206
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 207
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 208
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 209
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 210
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 211
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 212
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 213
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 214
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 215
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic 216
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 217
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 218
either the longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut or the strongest 219
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the 220
longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, called SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and 221
the strongest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, called Neutrosophic 222
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 223
SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s 224
not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style 225
of a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. There isn’t any formation of any 226
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 227
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 228
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut theory, 229
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 230
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 231
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 232
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 233
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 234
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 235
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 236
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 237
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 238
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 239
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 240
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 241
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 242
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 243
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 244
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 245
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 246
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 247
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 248
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 249
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 250
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 251
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 252
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 253
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 254
called “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 255
to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 256
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 257
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 258
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 259
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 260
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 261
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 262
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 263
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 264
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 265
formally called “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” in the themes of jargons and 266
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 267
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in 268
the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 269
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 270
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 271
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 272
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 273
Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 274
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 275
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 276
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an 277
Extreme SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 278
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 279
either the optimal SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut or the Extreme 280
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in those Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general 281
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme 282
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 283
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 284
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. There isn’t any formation of any 285
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 286
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 287
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 288
find the “ amount of SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” of either individual of cells or the 289
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 290
of SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 291
group of cells? 292
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 293
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 294
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 295
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 296
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” and “Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” on 297
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken 298
more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this 299
SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 300
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 301
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 302
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 303
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 304
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 305
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are 306
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 307
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 308
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 309
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 310
and Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, are figured out in sections “ 311
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” and “Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”. In 312
the sense of tackling on getting results and in Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut to make sense about 313
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Extreme 314
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 315
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 316
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back 317
to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 318
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Extreme 319
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 320
Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 321
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 322
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 323
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 324
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”, 325
“Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 326
“Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 327
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 328
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 329
presented in section, “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”. The keyword of this research 330
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 331
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 332
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 333
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 334
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 335
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 336
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 337
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 338
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 339
3 Extreme Preliminaries Of This Scientific 340
Research On the Redeemed Ways 341
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 342
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [163],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 343
Set](Ref. [163],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 344
(NSHG)](Ref. [163],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 345
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [163],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [163], 346
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 347
(NSHG)](Ref. [163],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 348
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [163],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 349
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [163],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 350
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [163]. 351
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 352
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 353
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [163],Definition 2.1,p.1). 354
Let X be a Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut of points (objects) with generic elements in X

denoted by x; then the Neutrosophic set A (NS A) is an object having the form
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}

+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a
truth-membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets of 355
+
]− 0, 1 [. 356
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [163],Definition 2.2,p.2). 357
Let X be a Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut of points (objects) with generic elements in X

denoted by x. A single valued Neutrosophic set A (SVNS A) is characterized by
truth-membership function TA (x), an indeterminacy-membership function IA (x), and a
falsity-membership function FA (x). For each point x in X, TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) ∈ [0, 1].
A SVNS A can be written as
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.
Definition 3.3. The degree of truth-membership,

indeterminacy-membership and falsity-membership of the subset X ⊂ A of
the single valued Neutrosophic set A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
TA (X) = min[TA (vi ), TA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,
IA (X) = min[IA (vi ), IA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X ,

and FA (X) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 3.4. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued Neutrosophic set

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [163],Definition 358
2.5,p.2). 359
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 360
pair S = (V, E), where 361
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 362
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 363
1, 2, . . . , n); 364
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 365
V; 366
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 367
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 368
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 369
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 370
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 371
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 372
(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 . 373
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 374
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 375
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 376
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 377
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 378
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 379
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 380
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 381
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 382
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 383
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 384
(Ref. [163],Definition 2.7,p.3). 385
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 386
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 387
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 388
characterized as follow-up items. 389
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 390
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 391
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 392
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 393
HyperEdge; 394
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 395
SuperEdge; 396
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 397
SuperHyperEdge. 398
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 399
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 400
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [163], Definition 2.7, p.3). 401
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 402
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 403
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 404
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 405
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 406
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 407
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)). 408
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 409
pair S = (V, E), where 410
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 411
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 412
1, 2, . . . , n); 413
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 414
V; 415
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 416
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 417
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 418
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 419
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 420
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 421
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 422
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 423
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 424
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 425
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 426
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 427
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 428
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 429
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 430
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 431
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 432
(Ref. [163],Definition 2.7,p.3). 433
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 434
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 435
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 436
characterized as follow-up items. 437
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 438
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 439
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 440
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 441
HyperEdge; 442
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 443
SuperEdge; 444
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 445
SuperHyperEdge. 446
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 447
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 448
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 449
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 450
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 451
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 452
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 453
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 454
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 455
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 456
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 457
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 458
given SuperHyperEdges; 459
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 460
SuperHyperEdges; 461
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 462
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 463
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 464
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 465
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 466
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 467
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 468
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 469
common SuperVertex. 470
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 471
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 472
of following conditions hold: 473
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 476
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 477
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 478
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 479
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 480
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 481
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 482
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 483
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 484
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. 485
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 486
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 487
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 488
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 489
SuperHyperPath . 490
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 491
(Ref. [163],Definition 5.3,p.7). 492
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 493
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 494
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 495
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 496
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 497
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 498
(NSHE)). (Ref. [163],Definition 5.4,p.7). 499
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 500
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 501
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 502
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 503
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 504
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 505
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 506
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 508
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 509
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 511
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 512
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 513
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 514
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 515
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut). 516
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 518
either V 0 or E 0 is called 519
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression 520
is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 521
∀Ea ∈ C : C is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following 522
expression is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 523
criteria holds 524
∀Ea ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 525
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression 526
is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 527
∀Va ∈ C : C is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following 528
expression is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 529
criteria holds 530
∀Va ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 531
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 532
e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 533
re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 534
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 536
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut). 537
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 539
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 540
rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 544
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 545
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 546
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 547
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 548
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 549
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of 550
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 551
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 555
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 556
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 559
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 560
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 561
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 565
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 566
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 567
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 568
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded 570
to its Extreme coefficient; 571
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 572
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 573
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 578
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 579
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 580
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 581
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 582
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the 583
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 584
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 585
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 590
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 591
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 592
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 594
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of 595
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 596
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 600
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 601
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial 605
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 606
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 610
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 611
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 612
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 613
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded 615
to its Extreme coefficient; 616
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 617
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 618
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 623
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 624
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 625
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 626
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 627
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; and the 628
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 629
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut). 630
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 631
(i) an δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 632
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut such that either of the following expressions hold 633
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 634
|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 635
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 636
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind 637
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut such that either of the following 638
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 639
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 640
|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. 641
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 642
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 643
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, there’s a 644
need to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 645
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 646
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 647
assign to the values. 648
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 649
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 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)
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 651
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 652
understandable. 653
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 654
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 655
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 656
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 657
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 658
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 659
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 660
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 661
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 662
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 663
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut more Neutrosophicly understandable. 664
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, there’s a 665
need to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic 666
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 667
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 668
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 669
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. It’s redefined a 670
Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the Table (3) holds. 671

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

Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 672
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 673
Forms 674
Definition 4.1. (Extreme event). 675
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 676
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Any Extreme k-subset of A of V is 677
called Extreme k-event and if k = 2, then Extreme subset of A of V is called 678
Extreme event. The following expression is called Extreme probability of A. 679
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Extreme Independent). 680
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. s Extreme k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 682
Extreme s-independent if the following expression is called Extreme 683
s-independent criteria 684
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. 685
The following expression is called Extreme independent criteria 686
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Extreme Variable). 687
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Any k-function Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 689
like E is called Extreme k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function 690
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut like E is called Extreme Variable. 691
The notion of independent on Extreme Variable is likewise. 692
Definition 4.4. (Extreme Expectation). 693
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. an Extreme k-Variable E has a 695
number is called Extreme Expectation if the following expression is called Extreme 696
Expectation criteria 697
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Extreme Crossing). 698
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. an Extreme number is called 700
Extreme Crossing if the following expression is called Extreme Crossing criteria 701
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). 702
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let m and n propose special 703
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then with m ≥ 4n, 704
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be an Extreme 705
random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G Extreme 706
independently with probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] and 707
H := G[S]. 708
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: 709
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
710
Theorem 4.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 711
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 712
points in the plane, and let l be the Extreme number of SuperHyperLines √ in the plane 713
passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 714
Proof. Form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet 715
P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive points on the 716
SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This Extreme 717
SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Extreme crossing at most l 718
choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , or 719
3
l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and again 720
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 721
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 723
points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 724
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 725
Proof. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 726
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 727
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Extreme number of 728

P n−1
these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then i = 0 ni = n 729
and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph H with

P
730
SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs 731
between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints on the SuperHyperCircles that pass 732
through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 733
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 734
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 735
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with 736
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 737
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 738
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 739
4/3 4/3
by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n + n < 5n . 740
Proposition 4.9. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 741
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let X be a 742
nonnegative Extreme Variable and t a positive real number. Then 743
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. 744
Corollary 4.10. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 745
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let Xn be a 746
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. 747
If E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 748
Proof. 749
Theorem 4.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 750
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. A special 751
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 752
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is 754
up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of 755
G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 756
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 757
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph G. 758
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 759
the indicator Extreme Variable for this Extreme Event. By equation, we have 760
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 761
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 762
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: 763
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 764
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 765
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 766
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 767
n → ∞. Consequently, an Extreme SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability 768
number at most k. 769
Definition 4.12. (Extreme Variance). 770
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. an Extreme k-Variable E has a 772
number is called Extreme Variance if the following expression is called Extreme 773
Variance criteria 774
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let X be an 776
Extreme Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 777
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let X be an Extreme Variable and let 779
t be a positive real number. Then 780
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ 2
= .
t t2
781
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let Xn be an 783
Extreme Variable in a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 784
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 785
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 787
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 788
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 789
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, 791
set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for which f (k) is 792
less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 793
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. As in the proof of related Theorem, 795
the result is straightforward. 796
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and 798
let f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 799
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 800
or 801
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 802
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 804
Definition 4.17. (Extreme Threshold). 805
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let P be a monotone property of 807
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 808
Extreme Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 809
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 810
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 811
Definition 4.18. (Extreme Balanced). 812
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let F be a fixed Extreme 814
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 815
copy of F as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph is called Extreme Balanced. 816
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Let F be a 818
nonempty balanced Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 819
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 820
as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph. 821
S = (V, E) is a probability Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 823
Example 4.20. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E) 824
in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 825
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 826
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 827
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 828
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 829
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 830
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 831
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 832
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 833
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 834
C(N SHG)Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut

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

Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.3)
835
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 838
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 839
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 840
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 841
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 842
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme 843
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 844

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + z 3 + z.
845

straightforward. 848

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
849

= {E4 }.
= z5.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 , {N }, {F }}.
= z 4 + z 3 + z 2 + 2z.
853




= {E1 }.
= z5.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 }.
= z 7 + 2z 4 + z 3 + z 2 .
857

= {Ei=110 , Ej=2232 , E12 }.
= 22z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
861


= {E15 , E13 , E16 , E14 , E17 , E12 }.
= 2z 5 + z 4 + 3z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
865

= {E3 }.
= z5.
= {Vi=811 , V!4 }.
= z 6 + 3z 5 + z 4 .



869

= {Ei=110 , E22 , E12 }.
= z 11 + 11z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
873


= {E1 , E6 , E2 , E7 , E3 , E4 }.
= 2z 5 + z 4 + 3z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
877

= {E1 , E6 , E3 , E8 }.
= 2z 3 + 2z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
881


= {E1 }.
= z5.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 , V7 , V8 }.
= z 8 + z 7 + 3z 5 .
885

= {E9 , E6 , E3 , E8 }.
= 2z 3 + 2z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
889




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
893


= {E4 }.
= z2.
= {V3 , V4 }.
= z4 + z3.
897

= {E4 }.
= z 10 .
= {Vi=817 }.
X
= ai z bj .
901


= {E4 }.
= z 10 .
= {Vi=817 }.
X
= ai z bj .
905

= {E4 }.
= z 10 .
= {Vi=817 }.
X
= ai z bj .
909




= {Ei=112 }.
X
= ai z bj .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
913

= {E6 }.
= z bj .
= {Vi ∈ VE6 }.
X
= ai z bj .
917


= {E1 , E2 }.
= z 10 + z 2 .
= {VE2 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + 7z.
921

= {E2 }.
= z 10 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + 7z.


925
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 926
The all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 927
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 928
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 929
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 930
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 931
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph 932
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only 933
the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside of 934
any given Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to 935
some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Extreme 936
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in 937
an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some 938
of them but not all of them. 939
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-Type-Cycle-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is 940
at least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 941
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In other 942
words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum 943
Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme 944
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme 945
SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, 946
has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are contained in an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 947
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Then
the Extreme number of type-result-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut with the least Extreme cardinality, 948
the lower sharp Extreme bound for cardinality. 949
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph 950
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 951
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is an Extreme type-result-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the 952
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme type-result-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is the 953
cardinality of 954
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−CutSuperHyperP 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-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp

bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut.
It’s the contradiction to that fact on the generality. There are some counterexamples to
deny this statement. One of them comes from the setting of the graph titled path and
cycle as the counterexamples-classes or reversely direction star as the examples-classes,
are well-known classes in that setting and they could be considered as the
examples-classes and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
Let V \ V \ {z} in mind. There’s no necessity on the SuperHyperEdge since we need at 955
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 956
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 957
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 958
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the Extreme 959
SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to be applied. 960
Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main definition but by 961
the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 962
The Extreme structure of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut. 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-Type-Cycle-Cut has the Extreme cardinality of an Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. Thus, an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut
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-Type-Cycle-Cut” 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-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph as used 963
Extreme background in the Extreme terms of worst Extreme case and the common 964
theme of the lower Extreme bound occurred in the specific Extreme SuperHyperClasses 965
of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are Extreme free-quasi-triangle. 966
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-Type-Cycle-Cut. Those Extreme SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in
an Extreme style-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 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-Type-Cycle-Cut is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut. 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, 967
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
968
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Extreme intended
SuperHyperVertices but in an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 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-Type-Cycle-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 969
is at least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 970
Extreme SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme 971
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Extreme 972
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Extreme number of Extreme 973
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in some cases but the 974
maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme 975
number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 976
contained in an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 977
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Extreme SuperHyperEdges. But the 978
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel addresses 979
some issues about the Extreme optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially delivers some 980
remarks on the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that 981
there’s distinct amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Extreme 982
SuperHyperVertices up to all taken from that Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 983
SuperHyperVertices but this Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 984
SuperHyperVertices is either has the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality or it 985
doesn’t have maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious 986
SuperHyperModel, there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge containing at least all 987
Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 988
where the Extreme completion of the Extreme incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 989
literarily, an Extreme embedded R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The SuperHyperNotions of 990
embedded SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, 991
these types of SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum 992
SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the embedded setting is elected such that those 993
SuperHyperSets have the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality and they’re 994
Extreme SuperHyperOptimal. The less than two distinct types of Extreme 995
SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum Extreme style of the embedded 996
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The interior types of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 997
are deciders. Since the Extreme number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by 998
the interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and 999
more formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Extreme SuperHyperSet for any 1000
distinct types of Extreme SuperHyperVertices pose the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1001
Thus Extreme exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Extreme 1002
SuperHyperEdge and in Extreme SuperHyperRelation with the interior Extreme 1003
SuperHyperVertices in that Extreme SuperHyperEdge. In the embedded Extreme 1004
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, there’s the usage of exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices since 1005
they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more 1006
relevant than the title “interior”. One Extreme SuperHyperVertex has no connection, 1007
inside. Thus, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices with one 1008
SuperHyperElement has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case 1009
implying the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 1010
with the exclusion of the exclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme 1011
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut with the 1012
inclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, is an 1013
Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 1014
Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge 1015
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme 1016
SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut minus all 1017
Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, 1018
there’s only an unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two 1019
distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 1020
minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1021
The main definition of the Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut has two titles. an 1022
Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and its corresponded quasi-maximum Extreme 1023
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any Extreme 1024
number, there’s an Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut with that quasi-maximum 1025
Extreme SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded Extreme 1026
SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Extreme SuperHyperGraph, then the 1027
Extreme quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the collection of all the Extreme 1028
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cuts for all Extreme numbers less than its Extreme 1029
corresponded maximum number. The essence of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ends 1030
up but this essence starts up in the terms of the Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 1031
again and more in the operations of collecting all the Extreme 1032
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cuts acted on the all possible used formations of the Extreme 1033
SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Extreme number. This Extreme number is 1034
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded 1035
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cuts. Let zExtreme Number , SExtreme SuperHyperSet and 1036
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut be an Extreme number, an Extreme SuperHyperSet and 1037
an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then 1038
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class = {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |

SExtreme SuperHyperSet = GExtreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ,
|SExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is 1039
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1040
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =

∪zExtreme Number {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1041
technical definition for the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut . 1042
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut =
{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 1043
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut poses the upcoming expressions. 1044
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1045
= max zExtreme Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1046

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1047


1048
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1049

1050

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, “Extreme 1051
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the Extreme 1052
SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 1053
incident to an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, another name for “Extreme 1054
Quasi-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of “Extreme 1055
Quasi-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” since “Extreme Quasi-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” happens 1056
“Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework 1057
and background but “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Extreme 1058
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1059
preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the Extreme 1060
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Extreme 1061
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Extreme Quasi-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut”, and “Extreme 1062
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” are up. 1063
Thus, let zExtreme Number , NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1064
GExtreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut be an Extreme number, an Extreme 1065
SuperHyperNeighborhood and an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and the new terms are 1066
up. 1067

∪zExtreme Number {NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |Extreme Cardinality
1068
{NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
|NExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number |
1069
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
1070
And with go back to initial structure, 1071


1072
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1073

1074

Thus, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1075
Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if for 1076
any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, some interior 1077
Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors with no 1078
Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of 1079
them. 1080
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1081
are coming up. 1082
The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices is the simple

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

Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1083
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1084
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-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut is up. The obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut
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-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1085
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1086
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1087
instead of all given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme 1088
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and it’s an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since it’s 1089
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-Type-Cycle-Cut. There isn’t only less than
two Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut,
is up. The non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme

Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, not:
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1090
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1091
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1092
Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1093
“Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” 1094
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1095
Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 1096
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-Type-Cycle-Cut amid those
obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, are
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1097
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph

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

sharp bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is the cardinality
of
To sum them up, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The 1098
all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 1099
quasi-R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 1100
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 1101
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 1102
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1103
Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let an Extreme 1104
SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Extreme SuperHyperVertices r. 1105
Consider all Extreme numbers of those Extreme SuperHyperVertices from that Extreme 1106
SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more than r distinct Extreme 1107
SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1108
SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s an Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut with the least 1109
cardinality, the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality. Assume a 1110
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1111
the Extreme SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of the 1112
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1113
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t an Extreme 1114
R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since it doesn’t have 1115
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 1116
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1117
some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1118
SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 1119
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices but it isn’t an Extreme 1120
R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since it doesn’t do the Extreme procedure such that such 1121
that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1122
uniquely [there are at least one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, 1123
sometimes in the connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), an Extreme 1124
SuperHyperVertex, titled its Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Extreme 1125
SuperHyperVertex in the Extreme SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Extreme 1126
procedure”.]. There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside the intended 1127
Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Extreme 1128
SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the obvious Extreme R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, VESHE is 1129
up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1130
R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, VESHE , is an Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only 1131
all Extreme SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Extreme pairs are titled 1132
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1133
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1134
VESHE , is the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality of an Extreme 1135
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme 1136
SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely. Thus, in a 1137
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any Extreme 1138
R-Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut only contains all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices and all 1139
exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices from the unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge where 1140
there’s any of them has all possible Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all 1141
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with no exception minus all Extreme 1142
SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of them but everything is possible about 1143
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods and Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1144
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, is up. There’s neither empty 1145
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1146
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple Extreme 1147
type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The Extreme SuperHyperSet 1148
of Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1149
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut

|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Hamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = az s + bz t .
is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The 1150
Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1151

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1152
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1153
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1155
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1156
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There are not only two Extreme 1157
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet. Thus the 1158
non-obvious Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is up. The obvious simple Extreme 1159
type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is an Extreme 1160
SuperHyperSet includes only two Extreme SuperHyperVertices. But the Extreme 1161
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1162

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme 1163
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the 1164
Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1165
the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1166

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1167
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1168
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1169

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1170
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1171
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1172
given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 1173
and it’s an Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Since it’s 1174
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1176
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1177
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There aren’t only less than three 1178
Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet, 1179

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Thus the non-obvious Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut , 1180

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1181
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, not: 1182

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not: 1183

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1184
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1185
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1186
“Extreme Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut ” 1187
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1188
Extreme ,
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 1189
is only and only 1190

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1191
5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 1192
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1193
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 1194
SuperHyperClasses. 1195
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 1196

= {Eimax }.
max
= z |Ei |
.
= {Vi ∈ Eimax }.
X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1197
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1198
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). 1199
There’s a new way to redefine as 1200
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 1201
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1202
The latter is straightforward. 1203
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 1204
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 1205
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1206
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1207
Figure 23. an Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Example (16.5)
Then 1208

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
1209
Proof. Let 1210
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1211
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. an Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.7)
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1212

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 1217
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 1218
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1219
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1220

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Figure 25. an Extreme SuperHyperStar Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1221
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1222
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 1223
a new way to redefine as 1224

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 1228
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 1229
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 1230
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 1231
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1232
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1233
Then 1234

= {Vi ∈ P min }.
X
= ai z bj .
= {Vi ∈ P min }.
X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1235
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
1236
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1237

The latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one 1241
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the 1242
SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut could be applied. There 1243
are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1244
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1245
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut taken from a connected Extreme 1246
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1247
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 1248
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 1250
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1251
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 1252
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1253
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 1254
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1255
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1256
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1257

= {Vi ∈ P min }.
X
= ai z bj .
= {Vi ∈ P min }.
X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1258
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
1259
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 1261

The latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one 1264
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the 1265
SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut could be applied. There 1266
are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1267
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1269
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1270
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1273
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1274
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 1275
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 1276
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1277
ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme 1278
Figure 27. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1280
Then, 1281

= {Ei=1|EN SHG |−1 , Ea∗ , Eb∗ }.
X
= ai z bj .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= ai z bj .
Proof. Let 1282
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1283
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1285

Figure 28. an Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.15)
The latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1288
Thus the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1289
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut could be applied. The unique embedded 1290
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut proposes some longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 1291
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1292
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1293
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 1294
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1295
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 1296
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1297
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1298
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1299
For the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and the 1300
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, some general results are introduced. 1301
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is 1302
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1303
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then 1304
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian − T ype − Cycle − Cut =

{theSuperHyperHamiltonian − T ype − Cycle − Cutof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperHamiltonian − T ype − Cycle − Cut
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperHamiltonian−T ype−Cycle−Cut. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 1305
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1306
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1307
Corollary 6.3. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 1308
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and 1309
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut coincide. 1310
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is an 1312
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if and only if it’s a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1313
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1315
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1316
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1317
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is 1318
its SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and reversely. 1319
Corollary 6.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 1320
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1321
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 1322
is its SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and reversely. 1323
Corollary 6.8. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1324
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1325
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1326
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1327
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1328
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1331
Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1332
Corollary 6.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1334
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1335
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is well-defined. 1336
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1337
its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1338
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1341
Then its Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1342
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1344
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1345
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1346
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1347
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1348
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1349
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1350
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1351
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1352
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1353
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1354
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1355
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1356
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1357
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1358
independent SuperHyperSet is 1359
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1360
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1361
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1362
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1363
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1364
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1365
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1366
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then V is 1367
a maximal 1368
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1369
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1370
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1371
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1372
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1373
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1374
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1375
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1376
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1377
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1378
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1379
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1380
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1381
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1382
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1383
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1384
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1386
number of 1387
(i) : the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1388
(ii) : the SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1389
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1390
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1391
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1392
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1393
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1394
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1395
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1397
(i) : the dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1398
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1399
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1400
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1401
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1402
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1403
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1404
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1407
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1408
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1409
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1410
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1414
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1415
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1416
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1419
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1420
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1421
is a 1422
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1426
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1427
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1428
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1431
number of 1432
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1436
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1437
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1438
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1439
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1440
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1441
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1443
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1444
(iv) : SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1448
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1449
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1450
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1451
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1452
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1453
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1454
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1455
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1459
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1461
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1462
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1463
setting of dual 1464
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1468
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1469
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1470
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1472
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1474
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1475
dual 1476
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1480
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1481
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1482
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1484
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1485
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1486
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1492
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1493
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1494
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1495
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1496
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1497
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S 1498
such that 1499
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1500
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1501
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1502
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then 1503
(i) S is SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut set; 1504
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1505
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1506
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1507
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1508
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1509
connected. Then 1510
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1511
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1512
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1513
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1514
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1516
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1517
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1518
a dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1519
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1520
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1521
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1523
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1524
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1525
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1526
dual SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1527
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then 1528
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1529
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1531
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1532
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1533
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1534
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then 1536
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1537
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1539
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1540
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1541
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1543
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1544
(ii) Γ = 1; 1545
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1546
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1547
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1549
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1550
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1551
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1552
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1553
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1554
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1555
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1556
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1557
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1559
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1560
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1561
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1563
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1564
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1566

bnc ; 1567
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1568
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1570
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1571
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1572
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut for N SHF; 1573
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1574
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1575
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1576
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1577
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1578
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1579
SuperHyperSet. Then 1580
b n c+1
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1581
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut for N SHF; 1582
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1583

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1584
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1585
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1587
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1588
SuperHyperSet. Then 1589
bnc
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1590
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut for N SHF : (V, E); 1591
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1592

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1593
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only dual maximal 1594
following statements hold; 1597
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1598
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then S is an 1599
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1600
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1601
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then S is a dual 1602
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1603
following statements hold; 1605
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1606
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then S is an 1607
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1608
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1609
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, then S is a dual 1610
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1611
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1612
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1613
hold; 1614
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1615
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1616
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1617
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1619
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1621
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1622
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1623
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1624
hold; 1625
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1626
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1628
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1630
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1632
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1633
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1635
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1636
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1637
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1639
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1641
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1644
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1646
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1647
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1648
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1650
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1652
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut; 1653
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1655
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1657
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1658
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1659
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1661
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1663
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1666
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1668
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1669
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1670
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1672
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1674
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1677
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1678
Recognition 1679
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1680
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease is 1681
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1682
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1683
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some Extreme 1684
treatments for this Extreme disease. 1685
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1686
Figure 29. an Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1687
long-term Extreme function. 1688
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme model 1689
[it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the move 1690
from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer 1691
hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and 1692
neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this event 1693
leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to 1694
have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1695
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1696
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1697
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1698
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an Extreme 1699
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 1700
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1701
find either the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut or the Extreme 1702
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut in those Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1703
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1704
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1705
SuperHyperModel 1706
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1707
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1708
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1709
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1710
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

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

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1711
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1712
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1713
the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1714
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1715
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1716
SuperHyperModel 1717
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1718
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1719
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1720
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1721
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous result, 1722
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1723
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1724
is the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. 1725
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1726
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1727
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1728
The SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut are 1729
defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1730
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1731
recognitions? 1732
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1733
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut? 1734
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1735
compute them? 1736
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1737
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut? 1738
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and the Extreme 1739
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1740
they’re based on SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, are there else? 1741
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1742
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1743
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1744
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1745
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1746
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1747
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1748
highlighted. 1749
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1750
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1751
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition 1752
of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1753
the new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1754
Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, finds the convenient background to implement 1755
some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme 1756
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1757
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title 1758
“Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1759
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are 1760
introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on the 1761
SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. The 1762
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this 1763
research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the 1764
results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 1765
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of 1766
this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups 1767
of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1768
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1769
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1770
called “ SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 1771
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1772
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-Type-Cycle-Cut
3. Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1773
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1774
12 Extreme SuperHyperDuality But As The 1775
Forms 1777
Definition 12.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperDuality). 1778
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider an 1779
Extreme SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either 1780
V 0 or E 0 is called 1781
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1782
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1783
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1784
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1785
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1786
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1787
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1788
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1789
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1790
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1791
(v) Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1792
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1793
rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1794
Definition 12.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperDuality). 1795
Extreme SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 1797
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1798
e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1799
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an 1800
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 1801
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1802
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1803
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1805
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1806
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1807
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1808
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1809
SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 1810
conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1811
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1812
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1813
Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1814
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1816
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 1817
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1818
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1819
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1820
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1821
Extreme coefficient; 1822
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1823
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1833
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1840
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1841
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 1845
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 1846
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1847
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1848
of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1849
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1853
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1854
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1858
Extreme coefficient. 1867
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 1871
E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 1872
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 1873
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, 1874
E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 1875
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1877
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 1880
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 1881
only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 1882
V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as 1883
an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in 1884
every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1885


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). 1928
Then 1929
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 1930
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 1934
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1938
Then 1940
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 1941
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1949
Proposition 12.8. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1950
Then 1951
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 1952
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1962
Proposition 12.10. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1963
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1964
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 1965
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 1970
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1971
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1972
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1974
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1975
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1983

= {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 1986
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme 1987

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1993
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), 2003
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 2004
Then, 2006
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 2007
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 2008
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2009

∃!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 2014
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2015
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained 2017
Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 2018
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 2020
13 Extreme SuperHyperJoin But As The 2021
Forms 2023
Definition 13.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperJoin). 2024
0 0
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E , ∃Ej ∈ E , such that 2028
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2029
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2030
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2031
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2033
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2034
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2035
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2036
(v) Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2038
re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2039
Definition 13.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperJoin). 2040
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2043
Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme 2044
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2045
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 2046
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 2047
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2048
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2049
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2050
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2052
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2056
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2057
Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2058
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2059
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2065
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2067
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2077
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2081
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2082
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2083
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2084
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2088
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2090
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2091
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2101
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. E1 2114
and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 2115
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2120
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. 2122
every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2128


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 2172
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 2173
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2177
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2181
Then 2183

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

.
Proof. Let 2184
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2192
Then 2194
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 2195

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2205
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 2208
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 2213
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2214
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2215
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2217
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2226

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 2229
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2230
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2231

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2234
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2235
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2236
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. 2247
Then, 2249

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

.
Proof. Let 2250
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2251

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2255
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2256
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2257
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2258
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2263
14 Extreme SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2264
Forms 2266
Definition 14.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperPerfect). 2267
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2271
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2272
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2273
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2274
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2276
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2277
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2278
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2279
(v) Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2281
Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme 2282
rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2283
Definition 14.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperPerfect). 2284
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2287
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2289
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 2293
SuperHyperPerfect; 2294
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2295
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2297
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2301
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2302
Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2303
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an 2304
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2310
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2312
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2322
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2323
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2329
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2330
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2331
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2334
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2335
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2336
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2337
of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2338
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2347
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2360
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2366
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. 2374


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 2418
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 2419
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2423
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2427
Then 2429
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 2430
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2438
Then 2440
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2441

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2451
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 2454
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 2459
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2460
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2461
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2462
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2463
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2472

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 2475
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme 2476

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2480
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2481
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2482
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. 2493
Then, 2495
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2496
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2497

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2501
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2502
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2503
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2504
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2509
15 Extreme SuperHyperTotal But As The 2510
Forms 2512
Definition 15.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperTotal). 2513
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2517
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2518
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2519
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2520
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2522
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2523
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2524
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2525
(v) Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2527
Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme 2528
rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2529
Definition 15.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperTotal). 2530
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2533
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2535
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2539
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2540
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2542
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2546
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2547
Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme 2548
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2549
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2555
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2557
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2567
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2571
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2572
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2573
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2574
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2578
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2580
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2581
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2591
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2604
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2610
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. 2618


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 2662
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 2663
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2667
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2671
Then 2673
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 2674
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. 2682
Then 2684
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 2685
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2695
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 2698
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2703
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2704
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2707
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2716

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 2719
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2720
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2721

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2724
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2725
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. 2737
Then, 2739
∗
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 2740
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2741

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2745
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2746
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2747
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2748
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2753
16 Extreme SuperHyperConnected But As The 2754
Forms 2756
Definition 16.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperConnected). 2757
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2761
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2762
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2763
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2764
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2766
such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2767
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2768
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2769
(v) Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2771
e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2772
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2773
Definition 16.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperConnected). 2774
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2777
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) 2779
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2780
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2781
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2782
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2784
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2785
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2788
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2789
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2790
SuperHyperConnected; 2792
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2793
of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2794
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2796
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2801
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2803
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2804
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2813
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2817
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2818
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2820
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2821
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2825
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2826
SuperHyperConnected; 2828
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2829
either of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, 2830
Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2831
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2832
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2839
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2840
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 2852
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 2853
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 2854
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 2855
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 2856
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 2857
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 2858
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2859
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 2862
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 2863
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 2864
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 2865
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2867


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 2931
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 2932
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 2936
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2940
Then 2942
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 2943
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 2946
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2951
Then 2953
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 2954
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2964
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 2967
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2972
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2973
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2976
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2977
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2985
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 2988
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2989

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2993
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2994
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. 3006
Then, 3008
∗
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 3009
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 3010

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3014
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3015
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3016
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3017
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 3023
17 Background 3024
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3025
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3026
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3027
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3028
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3029
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3030
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3031
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3032
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3033
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3034
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3035
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3036
results based on initial background. 3037
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating and 3038
Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in 3039
Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3040
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3041
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3042
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3043
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3044
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3045
Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research article studies 3046
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3047
the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3048
SuperHyperNumbers. 3049
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3050
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3051
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3052
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3053
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3054
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3055
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3056
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3057
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3058
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3059
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3060
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3061
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3062
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3063
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3064
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3065
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3066
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3067
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3068
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3069
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3070
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3071
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3072
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3073
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3074
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry 3075
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3076
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3077
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3078
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3079
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3080
Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3081
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3082
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3083
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3084
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3085
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3086
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3087
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3088
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett 3089
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3090
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett 3091
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3092
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3093
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3094
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3095
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3096
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3097
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3098
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3099
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3100
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3101
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3102
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3103
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3104
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3105
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3106
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3107
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3108
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3109
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3110
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3111
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3112
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [133] by Henry 3113
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3114
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3115
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [134] by Henry Garrett 3116
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3117
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3118
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [135] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3119
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3120
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3121
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [136] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3122
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3123
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [139] by 3124
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3125
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3126
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [140] by Henry 3127
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3128
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3129
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [143] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3130
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3131
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [146] by Henry 3132
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3133
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3134
in Ref. [147] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3135
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3136
Ref. [148] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3137
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3138
Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [149] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3139
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3140
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [150] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3141
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3142
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [151] by Henry Garrett 3143
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [162] by Henry 3145
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3146
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3147
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [163] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–163], there 3148
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3149
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books at [164–258]. 3150
Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4190 and 3151
5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [259, 260]. 3152
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3153
proposed as book in Ref. [247] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3154
Scholar and has more than 4190 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3155
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3156
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 3157
theory. 3158
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3159
proposed as book in Ref. [248] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3160
Scholar and has more than 5189 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3161
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3162
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3163
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3164
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3165
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3166
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3167
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3168
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in SuperHyperGraphs 3169
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–163] alongside scientific 3170
research books at [164–258]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms 3171
of high readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [259, 260]. 3172
References 3173
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3174
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3175
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3176
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3177
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3178
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3179
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3180
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3181
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3182
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3183
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3184
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3185
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3186
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3187
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3188
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3189
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3190
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by-eulerian- 3191
super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3192
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3193
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3194
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3195
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3196
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3197
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3198
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3199
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3200
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3201
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3202
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3203
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3204
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3205
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3206
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3207
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3208
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3209
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3210
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3211
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3212
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3213
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3214
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3215
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3216
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3217
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3218
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3219
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3220
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3221
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3222
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3223
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3224
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3225
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3226
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3227
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3228
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3229
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3230
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3231
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3232
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3233
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3234
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3235
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3236
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3237
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3238
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3239
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3240
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3241
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3242
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3243
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3244
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3245
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3246
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3247
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3249
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3253
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3254
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3255
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3256
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3257
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3258
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3259
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3260
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3261
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3262
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3263
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3264
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3265
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3266
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3267
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3268
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3269
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3270
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3271
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3272
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3273
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3274
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3275
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3277
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7796334). 3278
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3280
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3281
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3283
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3284
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3285
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3286
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791982). 3287
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3289
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7790026). 3290
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3291
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3292
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3295
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3296
33. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3297
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3298
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3301
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7781476). 3302
35. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3303
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3304
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3307
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7777857). 3308
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3310
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3312
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3313
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3314
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3316
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3319
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3320
41. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3321
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3322
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3323
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3325
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3328
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3331
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3332
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3334
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3335
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3337
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3338
47. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3339
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3340
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3341
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3343
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3346
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3349
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3350
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3352
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3355
53. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3357
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3359
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3361
55. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3363
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3364
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3367
57. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3369
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3370
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3373
59. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3375
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3377
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3379
61. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3381
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3382
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3385
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3386
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3388
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3391
65. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3393
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3395
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3397
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3398
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3400
68. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3402
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3404
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3406
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3407
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3408
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3409
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3410
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3412
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3413
72. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3414
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3415
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3418
74. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3420
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3421
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3424
76. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3426
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3427
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3430
78. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3432
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3434
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3436
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3437
80. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3438
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3439
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3442
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3443
82. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3444
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3445
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3448
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3449
84. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3450
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3451
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3454
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3455
86. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3456
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3457
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3460
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3461
88. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3462
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3463
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3466
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3467
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3468
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3469
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3471
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3472
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3475
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3476
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3477
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3478
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3481
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3482
95. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3483
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3484
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3487
97. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3489
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3490
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3493
99. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3495
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3496
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3498
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3499
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3502
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3505
103. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3507
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3508
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3510
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3511
105. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3513
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3514
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3515
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3516
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3517
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3518
107. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3519
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3520
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3522
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3523
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3524
109. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3525
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3526
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3527
110. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3528
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3529
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3530
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3531
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3534
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3535
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3538
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3539
113. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3540
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3542
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3543
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3546
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3547
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3550
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3551
116. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3552
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3553
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3554
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3555
117. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3556
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3557
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3558
118. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3559
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3560
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3561
119. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3562
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3563
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3564
120. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3565
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3566
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3567
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3568
121. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3569
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3570
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3571
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3572
122. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3573
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3574
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3575
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3576
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3577
123. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3578
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3579
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3580
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3581
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3582
124. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3583
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3584
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3585
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3586
125. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3587
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3588
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3589
126. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3590
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3591
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3593
127. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3594
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3595
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3596
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3597
128. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3598
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3599
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3600
129. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3601
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3602
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3603
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3604
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3605
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3606
130. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3607
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3608
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3609
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3610
131. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3611
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3612
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3613
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3614
132. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3615
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3616
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3617
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3618
133. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3619
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3620
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3621
134. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3622
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3623
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3624
135. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3626
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3627
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3628
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3629
136. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3630
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3631
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3632
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3633
137. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3634
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3635
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3636
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3637
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3639
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3640
139. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3641
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3642
140. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3644
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3645
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3646
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3651
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3655
143. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3656
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3657
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3658
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3659
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3662
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3664
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3665
146. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3666
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3667
In Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3671
10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3672
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3674
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3675
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3678
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3679
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3681
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3682
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3685
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3686
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3688
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3689
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3691
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3696
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3697
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3701
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3702
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3705
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3708
158. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3709
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3710
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3711
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3712
159. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3713
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3714
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3715
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3716
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3719
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3720
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3723
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3724
162. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3725
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 3726
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3727
163. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3728
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3729
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3730
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3731
164. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3732
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793875). 3733
165. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3734
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7792307). 3735
166. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3736
167. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3738
168. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3740
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3741
169. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3742
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3743
170. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3744
171. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3746
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3747
172. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3748
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3749
173. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3750
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3751
174. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3752
175. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3754
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3755
176. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3756
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3757
177. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3758
178. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3760
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3761
179. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3762
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3763
180. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3764
181. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3766
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3767
182. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3768
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3769
183. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3770
184. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3772
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3773
185. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3774
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3775
186. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3776
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3777
187. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3778
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3779
188. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3780
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 3781
189. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3782
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 3783
190. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3784
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 3785
191. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3786
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 3787
192. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3788
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 3789
193. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3790
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 3791
194. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3792
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 3793
195. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3794
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 3795
196. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3796
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 3797
197. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3798
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 3799
198. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3800
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 3801
199. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3802
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 3803
200. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3804
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 3805
201. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3806
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 3807
202. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3808
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 3809
203. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3810
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 3811
204. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3812
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 3813
205. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3814
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 3815
206. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3816
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 3817
207. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3818
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 3819
208. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3820
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 3821
209. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3822
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 3823
210. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3824
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 3825
211. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3826
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 3827
212. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3828
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 3829
213. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3830
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3831
214. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3832
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3833
215. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3834
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 3835
216. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3836
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3837
217. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3838
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3839
218. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3840
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3841
219. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3842
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 3843
220. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3844
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 3845
221. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3846
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 3847
222. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3848
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3849
223. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3850
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3851
224. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3852
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3853
225. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3854
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 3855
226. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3856
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 3857
227. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3858
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3859
228. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3860
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3861
229. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3862
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3863
230. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3864
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3865
231. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3866
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 3867
232. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3868
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 3869
233. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3870
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3871
234. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3872
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3873
235. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3874
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3875
236. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3876
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3877
237. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3878
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3879
238. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3880
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3881
239. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3882
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3883
240. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3884
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3885
241. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3886
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3887
242. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3888
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3889
243. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3890
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3891
244. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3892
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3893
245. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3894
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3895
246. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3896
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3897
247. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3898
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3899
248. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3900
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3901
249. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3902
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3903
250. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3904
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3905
251. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3906
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3907
252. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3908
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3909
253. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3910
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3911
254. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3912
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3913
255. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3914
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3915
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3916
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3917
257. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3918
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 3919
258. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3920
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 3921
259. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3922
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 3923
260. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3924
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 3925
View publication stats

New Ideas On Super Hammy by Hyper Hamper of Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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 Hammy by Hyper Hamper of Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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 Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut

Preprint · April 2023

422 PUBLICATIONS 9,966 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

Featured Articles View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 2

Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 10

S is a Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 14

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 16

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

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

v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 19

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut criteria holds 21

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

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23

e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 24

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 25

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut). 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-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29

e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 30

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 31

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut; a Neutrosophic 36

SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37

e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 38

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 39

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 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-Type-Cycle-Cut; an Extreme SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 45

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

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 47

v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 48

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 49

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

Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 52

conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 53

corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut 55

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, 56

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, Neutrosophic 57

v-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut, and Neutrosophic 58

rv-SuperHyperHamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 59

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 60

the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 61

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 62