New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/369881578
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA
Preprint · April 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7809328
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
432 PUBLICATIONS 10,906 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project
On Combinatorics View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 07 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 In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy 3
On Super EULA 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
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 10
Eulerian-Path-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-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
a SuperHyperPath and it has
the all number of SuperHyperEdges;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 15
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 19
∀Va ∈ P : P is
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 21
∀Va ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 23
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and 24
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut). 25
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 26
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 27
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 28
e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 29
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and 30
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 31
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 32
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 33
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 34
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of 35
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 36
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 37
and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 38
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 39
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 40
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 41
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 42
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 43
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 44
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 45
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 46
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 47
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 48
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 49
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; and the 50
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 51
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 52
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 55
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 56
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 57
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 58
conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 59
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 60
and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme 61
V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 62
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 65
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 66
conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 67
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; a 68
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 69
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 72
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 73
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 76
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 77
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 80
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 81
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 82
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; and the 84
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 85
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 86
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 89
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 91
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 92
cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 93
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 94
and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this 95
scientific research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 96
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Two different 97
types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and 98
the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 99
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 100
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 101
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 102
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 103
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 104
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 105
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 106
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 107
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 108
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 109
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 110
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 111
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 112
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 113
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 114
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 115
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 116
δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 117
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 118
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 119
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 120
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 121
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is a 122
maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 123
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 124
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 125
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 126
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 127
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 128
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 129
version of a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to 130
make a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut more understandable. For the sake of having 131
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 132
“SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 133
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the 134
usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 135
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the 136
mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, 137
HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” 138
with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number of Position in 139
Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 140
“The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 141
HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 142
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 143
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 144
based on a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the 145
foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to 146
have all SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut until the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then it’s officially 147
called a “SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut . 148
There are some instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a 149
“SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut ”. These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment 150
since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a 151
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut . For the sake of having a Neutrosophic 152
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “Neutrosophic 153
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” and a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut ”. The 154
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 155
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 156
assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 157
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a 158
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” if 159
the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of 160
SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a 161
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut more understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic 162
SuperHyperGraph. There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended 163
Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 164
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, 165
are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut”, 166
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 167
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 168
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” where it’s 169
the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 170
amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 171
.] SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut . A graph is a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a 172
SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 173
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some SuperHyperClasses as 174
follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 175
SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s only one 176
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s 177
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s 178
SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 179
SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has no 180
SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 181
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi 182
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a SuperHyperWheel if it’s only 183
one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex 184
has one SuperHyperEdge with any common SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel 185
proposes the specific designs and the specific architectures. The SuperHyperModel is 186
officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this 187
SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are 188
SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the common and intended properties 189
between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as 190
“SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some degrees of determinacy, 191
indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise SuperHyperModel which in this case 192
the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In the future research, the foundation 193
will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the results and the definitions will be 194
introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 195
The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and 196
the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the 197
move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, 198
indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that 199
region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Neutrosophic 200
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 201
There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 202
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the cancer 203
on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 204
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 205
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 206
either the longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut or the strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 207
in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 208
called SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and the strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, called 209
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, some general results are introduced. Beyond 210
that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges 211
but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form 212
any style of a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. There isn’t any formation of any 213
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 214
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic familiarity 215
with Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and 216
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 217
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Cancer’s 218
Neutrosophic Recognition 219
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 220
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 221
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 222
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 223
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 224
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 225
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 226
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 227
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 228
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 229
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 230
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 231
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 232
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 233
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 234
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 235
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 236
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 237
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 238
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 239
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 240
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 241
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 242
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 243
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 244
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 245
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 246
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 247
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 248
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 249
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 250
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 251
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 252
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 253
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 254
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 255
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 256
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 257
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 258
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 259
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 260
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 261
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 262
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 263
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 264
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 265
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 266
either the optimal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut or the Neutrosophic 267
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general 268
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic 269
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 270
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 271
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 272
but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. It, literarily, deforms 273
and it doesn’t form. 274
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 275
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” of either individual of cells or the groups 276
of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 277
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of 278
cells? 279
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 280
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 281
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 282
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 283
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” on 284
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 285
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 286
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 287
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 288
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 289
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 290
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 291
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 292
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 293
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 294
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 295
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 296
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and 297
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, are figured out in sections “ 298
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut”. In the sense of 299
tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Path-Cut to make sense about continuing the 300
research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are 301
introduced and as their consequences, corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out 302
to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 303
“Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, 304
there are some smart steps toward the common notions to extend the new notions in 305
new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the 306
sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 307
SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general SuperHyperRelations and 308
as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are contained in the section 309
“General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are 310
well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, 311
“General Results”, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut”, “Neutrosophic 312
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 313
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s done 314
about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and going 315
to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 316
presented in section, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut”. The keyword of this research debut in 317
the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and subsections 318
“Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as SuperHyperModel” and 319
“Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. 320
In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s 321
done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of “questions” and “problems” 322
to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. The advantages and the 323
limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this research to make sense 324
and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the section, “Conclusion and 325
Closing Remarks”. 326
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 327
Research On the Redeemed Ways 328
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 329
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [168],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 330
Set](Ref. [168],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 331
(NSHG)](Ref. [168],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 332
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [168],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [168], 333
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 334
(NSHG)](Ref. [168],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 335
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [168],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 336
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [168],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 337
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [168]. 338
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 339
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 340
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [168],Definition 2.1,p.1). 341
Let X be a Eulerian-Path-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 342
+
]− 0, 1 [. 343
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [168],Definition 2.2,p.2). 344
Let X be a Eulerian-Path-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. [168],Definition 345
2.5,p.2). 346
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 347
pair S = (V, E), where 348
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 349
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 350
1, 2, . . . , n); 351
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 352
V; 353
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 354
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 355
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 356
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 357
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 358
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 359
(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 . 360
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 361
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 362
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 363
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 364
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 365
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 366
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 367
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 368
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 369
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 370
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 371
(Ref. [168],Definition 2.7,p.3). 372
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 373
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 374
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 375
characterized as follow-up items. 376
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 377
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 378
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 379
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 380
HyperEdge; 381
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 382
SuperEdge; 383
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 384
SuperHyperEdge. 385
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 386
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 387
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [168], Definition 2.7, p.3). 388
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 389
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 390
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 391
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 392
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 393
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 394
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)). 395
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 396
pair S = (V, E), where 397
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 398
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 399
1, 2, . . . , n); 400
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 401
V; 402
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 403
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 404
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 405
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 406
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 407
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 408
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 409
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 410
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 411
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 412
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 413
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 414
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 415
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 416
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 417
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 418
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 419
(Ref. [168],Definition 2.7,p.3). 420
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 421
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 422
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 423
characterized as follow-up items. 424
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 425
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 426
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 427
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 428
HyperEdge; 429
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 430
SuperEdge; 431
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 432
SuperHyperEdge. 433
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 434
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 435
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 436
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 437
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 438
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 439
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 440
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 441
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 442
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 443
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 444
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 445
given SuperHyperEdges; 446
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 447
SuperHyperEdges; 448
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 449
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 450
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 451
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 452
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 453
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 454
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 455
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 456
common SuperVertex. 457
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 458
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 459
of following conditions hold: 460
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 461
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 462
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 463
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 464
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 465
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 466
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 467
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 468
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 469
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 470
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 471
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. 472
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 473
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 474
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 475
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 476
SuperHyperPath . 477
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 478
(Ref. [168],Definition 5.3,p.7). 479
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 480
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 481
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 482
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 483
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 484
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 485
(NSHE)). (Ref. [168],Definition 5.4,p.7). 486
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 487
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 488
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 489
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 490
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 491
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 492
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 493
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 495
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 496
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 498
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 499
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 500
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 501
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 502
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut). 503
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 505
either V 0 or E 0 is called 506
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 507
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is 509
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 510
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 511
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is 512
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 513
∀Va ∈ P : P is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is 514
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 515
∀Va ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 516
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 517
e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 518
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic 519
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 520
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut). 521
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 524
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 527
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 528
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 529
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 530
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 531
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 532
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 533
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 536
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 537
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 538
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 540
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 542
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 543
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and 544
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 545
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 546
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 547
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 548
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 549
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 550
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 551
Extreme coefficient; 552
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 553
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 556
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 557
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 558
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 559
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 560
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 561
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power 562
is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 563
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 564
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 567
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 568
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 569
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 570
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 571
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 573
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 576
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 577
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 578
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 580
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 582
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 585
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 588
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 591
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 593
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 596
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 599
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power 602
is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 603
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut). 604
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 605
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 606
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut such that either of the following expressions hold for the 607
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
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 608
|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 609
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 610
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of 611
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut such that either of the following 612
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 613
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 614
|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. 615
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 616
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 617
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, there’s a need to 618
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 619
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 620
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 621
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 622
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 623
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 624
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 625
understandable. 626
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 627
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 628
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 629
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 630
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 631
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 632
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 633
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 634
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 635
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 636
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut more Neutrosophicly understandable. 637
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, there’s a need to 638
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut”. The 639

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, Mentioned in the Definition
(3.22)

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 640
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 641
assign to the values. 642
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 643
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the Table (3) holds. 644
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As The Eulerian-Path-Cut 645
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 646
Forms 647
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 648
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is called 650
Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is called 651
Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic probability 652
of A. 653
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 654
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 656
Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 657
s-independent criteria 658
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 659
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 660
criteria 661
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 662
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Any k-function Eulerian-Path-Cut like E is called 664
Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Eulerian-Path-Cut like E is called 665
Neutrosophic Variable. 666
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 667
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 668
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is 670
called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 671
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 672
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 673
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. A Neutrosophic number is called 675
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 676
Crossing criteria 677
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 678
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let m and n propose 679
special Eulerian-Path-Cut. Then with m ≥ 4n, 680
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 681
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 682
Neutrosophic independently with probability Eulerian-Path-Cut p := 4n/m, and set 683
H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 684
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Neutrosophic number of

SuperHyperVertices, Y the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperEdges, and Z the
Neutrosophic number of crossings of H. The trivial bound noted above, when applied to
H, yields the inequality Z ≥ cr(H) ≥ Y − 3X. By linearity of Neutrosophic Expectation,
E(Z) ≥ E(Y ) − 3E(X).
Now E(X) = pn, E(Y ) = p2 m (each SuperHyperEdge having some SuperHyperEnds)

and E(Z) = p4 cr(G) (each crossing being defined by some SuperHyperVertices). Hence
p4 cr(G) ≥ p2 m − 3pn.
Dividing both sides by p4 , we have: 685
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ 3
= 3 = m n .
p (4n/m) 64
686
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 687
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet 688
of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperLines

√ in the 689
plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then 690
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 691
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 692
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive 693
points on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 694
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 695
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 696
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 697
again l < 32n2 /k 3 . 698
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet 700
of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 701
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 702
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 703
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 704
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 705
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 706
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
707
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 708
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints 709
on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 710
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 711
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 712
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 713
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 714
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 715
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 716
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 717
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 718
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let X be a nonnegative 719
Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 720
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. 721
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 722
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let Xn be a nonnegative 723
integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 as 724
n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 725
Proof. 726
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. A special 728
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 729
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p 731
is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of 732
G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 733
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 734
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 735
G. 736
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 737
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 738
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 739
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 740
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: 741
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 742
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 743
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 744
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 745
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 746
stability number at most k. 747
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 748
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is 750
called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 751
Variance criteria 752
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let X be a Neutrosophic 754
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 755
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let X be a Neutrosophic Variable 757
and let t be a positive real number. Then 758
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
759
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let Xn be a Neutrosophic 761
Variable in a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 762
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 763
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 765
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 766
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 767
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 769
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 770
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 771
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 772
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. As in the proof of related Theorem, 774
the result is straightforward. 775
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let f 777
and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 778
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 779
or 780
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 781
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 783
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 784
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let P be a monotone property of 786
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 787
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 788
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 789
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 790
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 791
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 793
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 794
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 795
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. Let F be a nonempty 797
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 798
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 799
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 800
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 802
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 803
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 804
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 805
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 806
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 807
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 808
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 809
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 810
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 811
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 812
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 813
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 814
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Eulerian-Path-Cut
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Eulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
815
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 818
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 819
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 820
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 821
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 822
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 823

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + z.
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)


825
straightforward. 828

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
829

= {E4 , E5 , E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 5 + 2z 3 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG | .
833


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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
841




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
845

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
849


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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
857

Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
861

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
865


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
869

= {E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 2 .
= {V2 , V1 , V3 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
873




= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
= 5z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
877

= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG | .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
881


= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 , E6 }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
885

= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 , E6 }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
889




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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
897


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
901

= {E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X


905
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 906
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 907
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 908
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 909
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 910
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 911
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 912
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 913
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 914
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut minus all Neutrosophic 915
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 916
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 917
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut, minus all 918
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 919
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic
R-Eulerian-Path-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut 920
is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of 921
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 922
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 923
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 924
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut in some cases but the 925
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Neutrosophic 926
number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 927
are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. 928
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut has, the least Neutrosophic
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality, is the
Neutrosophic cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s a Neutrosophic type-result-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut with the least Neutrosophic 929
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 930
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 931
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 932
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−Cut = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Eulerian-Path-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower 933
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Eulerian-Path-Cut is the 934
cardinality of 935
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−Cut = {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.

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

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

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

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

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

connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and
their quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-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 936
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 937
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 938
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 939
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 940
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 941
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 942
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 943
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut decorates the

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Neutrosophic connections so
as this Neutrosophic style implies different versions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges
with the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality in the terms of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The lower Neutrosophic bound is to have the
maximum Neutrosophic groups of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have perfect
Neutrosophic connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges and the outside of this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the connectedness of the
used Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph arising from its Neutrosophic properties taken
from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, then there’s no
Neutrosophic connection. Furthermore, the Neutrosophic existence of one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex has no Neutrosophic effect to talk about the Neutrosophic
R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since at least two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices involve to make a
title in the Neutrosophic background of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
but at least two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices make the Neutrosophic version of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Neutrosophic setting of non-obvious
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge.
It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is used as Neutrosophic adjective for
the initial Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no Neutrosophic appearance
of the loop Neutrosophic version of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The Neutrosophic adjective “loop”

on the basic Neutrosophic framework engages one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex but
it never happens in this Neutrosophic setting. With these Neutrosophic bases, on a
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, there’s at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
thus there’s at least a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut has the Neutrosophic cardinality of
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut has the
Neutrosophic cardinality at least a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Assume a
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet isn’t a
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut since either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is an
obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel thus it never happens since there’s no
Neutrosophic usage of this Neutrosophic framework and even more there’s no
Neutrosophic connection inside or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious and
as its consequences, there’s a Neutrosophic contradiction with the term “Neutrosophic
R-Eulerian-Path-Cut” since the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality never happens for this
Neutrosophic style of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no
Neutrosophic connection inside as mentioned in first Neutrosophic case in the forms of
drawback for this selected Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Neutrosophic case implies having the Neutrosophic style of
on-quasi-triangle Neutrosophic style on the every Neutrosophic elements of this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Precisely, the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut is the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that some
Neutrosophic amount of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle
Neutrosophic style. The Neutrosophic cardinality of the v SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
But the lower Neutrosophic bound is up. Thus the minimum Neutrosophic cardinality
of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality ends up the Neutrosophic discussion. The
first Neutrosophic term refers to the Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph but this key point is enough since there’s a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperClass of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has no on-quasi-triangle
Neutrosophic style amid some amount of its Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. This
Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel proposes a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet has only some amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from one
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge such that there’s no Neutrosophic amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges more than one involving these some amount of these
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The Neutrosophic cardinality of this Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet is the maximum and the Neutrosophic case is occurred in the minimum
Neutrosophic situation. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
Has the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such that
Contains some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

distinct-covers-order-amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges for amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices taken from the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
It means that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
Is a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 944
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 945
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 946
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 947
free-quasi-triangle. 948
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic

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

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

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

E
Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 949
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
950
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut where E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic intended
SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could
be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the Neutrosophic
cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 951
R-Eulerian-Path-Cut is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 952
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 953
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 954
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 955
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut in some 956
cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 957
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 958
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. 959
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 960
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 961
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 962
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 963
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 964
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 965
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 966
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 967
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 968
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 969
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 970
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut where the 971
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, 972
a Neutrosophic embedded R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 973
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 974
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 975
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 976
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 977
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 978
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. The 979
interior types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the 980
Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior 981
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 982
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any 983
distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic 984
R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in 985
one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the 986
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In 987
the embedded Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut, there’s the usage of exterior Neutrosophic 988
SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the 989
title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One Neutrosophic 990
SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 991
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement has been ignored in 992
the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. 993
The Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut with the exclusion of the exclusion of all Neutrosophic 994
SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the 995
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut with the inclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 996
in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. To sum 997
them up, in a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 998
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the 999
maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of 1000
any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut minus all Neutrosophic 1001
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only 1002
an unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 1003
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut, minus all 1004
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1005
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut has two titles. a 1006
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut and its corresponded quasi-maximum Neutrosophic 1007
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any 1008
Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut with that 1009
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 1010
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1011
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1012
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cuts for all Neutrosophic numbers 1013
less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 1014
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the 1015
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut, again and more in the operations of collecting all 1016
the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cuts acted on the all possible used formations of the 1017
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. This 1018
Neutrosophic number is 1019
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cuts. Let 1020
zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut be a 1021
Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut. 1022
Then 1023
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut is 1024
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1025
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

∪zNeutrosophic Number {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1026
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut. 1027
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut =
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
= zNeutrosophic Number |
= max zNeutrosophic Number }.
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Neutrosophic 1028
Eulerian-Path-Cut poses the upcoming expressions. 1029
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1030
= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1031

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1032


1033
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1034

1035

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1036
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1037
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1038
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1039
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Cut” but, precisely, it’s the 1040
generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Cut” since “Neutrosophic 1041
Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Cut” happens “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut” in a Neutrosophic 1042
SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but “Neutrosophic 1043
SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut” in a 1044
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background 1045
since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise 1046
from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 1047
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Cut”, and “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut” are up. 1048
Thus, let zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1049
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1050
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut and the new terms are up. 1051

∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1052
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1053
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1054
And with go back to initial structure, 1055


1056
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1057

1058

Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1059
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut if 1060
for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some 1061
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic 1062
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic 1063
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1064
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1065
are coming up. 1066
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

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

The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1067
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1068
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S

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

R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1069
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1070
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1071
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1072
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut and it’s an Neutrosophic 1073
Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since it’s 1074
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S

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

Eulerian-Path-Cut, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1075
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1076
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1077
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1078
“Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut” 1079
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1080
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut, 1081
is only and only
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

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

obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1082
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1083
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1084
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1085
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1086
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1087
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1088
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1089
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1090
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1091
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1092
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1093
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1094
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut with the least cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic 1095
bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1096
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1097
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1098
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1099
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1100
R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since it doesn’t have 1101
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1102
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1103
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1104
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1105
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1106
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic procedure 1107
such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic 1108
SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1109
outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1110
ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its Neutrosophic 1111
SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the Neutrosophic 1112
SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. There’s only one 1113
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1114
VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the 1115
obvious Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut, VESHE is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic 1116
type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut, VESHE , is a Neutrosophic 1117
SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices does 1118
forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in 1119
a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic 1120
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1121
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1122
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1123
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1124
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1125
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Cut only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1126
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1127
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1128
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1129
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1130
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1131
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1132
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Eulerian-Path-Cut, is up. There’s neither empty 1133
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1134
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1135
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut. The Neutrosophic 1136
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1137
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−Cut

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−Cut = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut . The 1138
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1139
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1140

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1141
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1142
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1145
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1146
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1147
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut is up. 1148
The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic 1149
Eulerian-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic 1150
SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1151

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic 1153
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1154
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 1155
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1156

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1157
Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1158

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1160
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1161
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1162
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1163
called the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut and it’s an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut. Since 1164
it’s 1165
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1167
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1168
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1169
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1170
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1171

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut , 1172

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1173
Eulerian-Path-Cut, not: 1174

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1175

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1176
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1177
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1178
“Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Cut ” 1179
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1180
Neutrosophic ,
Eulerian-Path-Cut 1181
is only and only 1182

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1183
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1184
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1185
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1186
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1187
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1188
Then 1189

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
Proof. Let 1190
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1191
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1192
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Example (16.5)
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1193
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 1194
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. The latter 1195
is straightforward. 1196
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1197
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1198
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1199
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1200
Then 1201

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1202
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1203
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1204
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1205

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1209
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1210
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1211
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1213
Then 1214

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1215
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

1216
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1217
There’s a new way to redefine as 1218

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1222
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1223
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1224
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1225
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1226
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1227
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1228

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1229
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
1230
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1231
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1232

is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Thus the 1235
notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1236
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus 1237
every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1238
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1239
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1240
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1241
solution 1242
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1243
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1244
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1245
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1246
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1247
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1248
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1249
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1250
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1251

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

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Example (16.11)
Proof. Let 1252
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
1253
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 1255

is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Thus the 1258
notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1259
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus 1260
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Example (16.13)
every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1261
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1262
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1263
solution 1265
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1267
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1268
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1269
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1270
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1271
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1272
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1273
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1274
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 1275

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1276
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1277
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1279

is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Thus the notion 1282
of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut could 1283
be applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut proposes some longest 1284
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 1285
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1288
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1289
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1290
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1291
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1293
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1294
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and the 1295
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, some general results are introduced. 1296
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is “redefined” 1297
on the positions of the alphabets. 1298
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.15)
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Then 1299
N eutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian − P ath − Cut =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − P ath − Cutof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − P ath − Cut
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−P ath−Cut. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1300
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1301
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1302
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1303
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and 1304
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut coincide. 1305
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1307
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1308
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1310
strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1311
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1312
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is its 1313
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and reversely. 1314
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 1315
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1316
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 1317
is its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and reversely. 1318
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1319
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut isn’t 1320
well-defined. 1321
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1322
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1323
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1324
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1326
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1327
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1328
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1329
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is 1330
well-defined. 1331
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1332
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1333
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is well-defined. 1334
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1336
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1337
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut is well-defined. 1338
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1339
is 1340
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1341
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1342
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1343
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1344
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1345
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1346
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1347
∅ is 1348
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1349
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1350
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1351
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1352
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1353
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1354
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1355
independent SuperHyperSet is 1356
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1357
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1358
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1359
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1360
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1361
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1362
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1363
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1364
maximal 1365
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1366
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1367
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1368
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1369
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1370
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1371
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1372
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1373
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1374
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1375
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1376
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1377
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1378
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1379
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1380
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1381
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then the number 1383
of 1384
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1385
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1386
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1387
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1388
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1389
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1390
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1391
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1392
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1394
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1395
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1396
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1397
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1398
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1399
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1400
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1401
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1404
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1405
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1406
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1407
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1411
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1412
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1413
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1416
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1417
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1418
is a 1419
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1423
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1424
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1425
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1428
number of 1429
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1433
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1434
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1435
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1436
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1437
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1438
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1440
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1441
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1445
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1446
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1447
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1448
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1449
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1450
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1451
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1452
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1456
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

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

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1489
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1490
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1491
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1492
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1493
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1494
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1495
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1496
that 1497
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1498
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1499
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1500
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then 1501
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut set; 1502
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1503
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1504
Then 1505
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1506
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1507
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1508
which is connected. Then 1509
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1510
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1511
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1512
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1513
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1515
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1516
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1517
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1518
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1519
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1520
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1521
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1522
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1523
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1524
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1525
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Then 1526
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1527
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1529
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1530
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1531
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1532
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. Then 1534
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1535
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1537
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1538
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1539
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1541
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1542
(ii) Γ = 1; 1543
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1544
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1545
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1546
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1547
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1548
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1549
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1550
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1551
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1552
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1553
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1554
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1556
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

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

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

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1581
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1582
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1583
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1584
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1585
SuperHyperSet. Then 1586
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1587
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E); 1588
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1589

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1590
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut for 1591
N SHF : (V, E). 1592
Then following statements hold; 1594
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1595
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then S is an 1596
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1597
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1598
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then S is a dual 1599
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1600
Then following statements hold; 1602
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1603
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1604
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1606
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, then S is a dual 1607
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1608
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1609
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1610
statements hold; 1611
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1612
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 1613
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1614
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1616
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1618
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1619
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1620
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1621
statements hold; 1622
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1623
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c

+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1625
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1627
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1629
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. 1630
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1632
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1633
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1634
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

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

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

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

sophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1699
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut or the Neutrosophic 1700
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1701
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1702
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1703
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1704
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1705
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1706
featured. 1707
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1708
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1709
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1710
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1711
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1712
Figure 30. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1714
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1715
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1716
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1717
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1718
Neutrosophic featured. 1719
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1720
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1721
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1722
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1723
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1724
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 SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-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 SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 1733
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-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
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut? 1738
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic 1739
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re 1740
based on SuperHyperEulerian-Path-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 Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1750
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1751
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of 1752
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based 1753
on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new 1754
SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, finds the convenient 1755
background to implement some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and 1756
some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of 1757
the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s 1758
mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the 1759
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, the new SuperHyperClasses and 1760
SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on 1761
the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. The 1762
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In 1763
this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1764
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 1765
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1766
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1767
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1768
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1769
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1770
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1771
The 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 1773
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1774
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1775
Forms 1777
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1778
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1782
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1783
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1784
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1785
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1786
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1787
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1788
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1789
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1790
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1791
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1792
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1793
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1794
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1795
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1798
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1800
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1801
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1802
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1803
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1805
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1806
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1809
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1810
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1813
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1814
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1815
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1816
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1817
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 1818
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1819
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1820
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1821
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1822
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1824
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1825
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1827
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1828
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1829
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1830
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 1831
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 1832
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1833
Neutrosophic coefficient; 1834
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1835
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 1840
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1842
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1843
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1847
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1850
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1851
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1856
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1857
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1859
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1861
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1867
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1870
Neutrosophic coefficient. 1871
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1875
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1876
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1877
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1878
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1879
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1880
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1881
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1882
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
SuperHyperDuality. 1891


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.

(1 × 1 × 2)z.

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

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



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1954
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1955
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1956
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1960
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1964
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1965
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1966
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Proof. Let 1967
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1978
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1979
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1989
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 1992
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 1997
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1998
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1999
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2000
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2001
solution 2004
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2011

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2014
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2015

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2021
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2026
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2034
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
|z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2037
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Neutrosophic Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2038
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2039

∃!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 2044
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2045
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2052
Forms 2054
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2055
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2059
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2060
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2061
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2062
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2064
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2065
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2066
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2067
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2069
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2070
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2071
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2072
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2075
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2076
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2077
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2078
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2079
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2082
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2083
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2085
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2086
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2090
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2091
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2092
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2093
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2094
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2099
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2101
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 2104
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2106
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2107
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2110
coefficient; 2111
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2112
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2115
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2116
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2117
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2119
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2120
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2127
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2128
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2136
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2138
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2144
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2147
coefficient. 2148
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2152
SuperHyperJoin. 2160
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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


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

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

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

.
Proof. Let 2234
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2238
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2242

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

.
Proof. Let 2245
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2256
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2257

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2267
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin

= (PERFECT MATCHING).
{Ei ∈ EPi ESHG:(V,E) ,
∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | = min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
If ∃Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) | =
6 min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |.
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
where ∀Pi ESHG:(V,E) , |Pi ESHG:(V,E) |
= min |Pi ESHG:(V,E) ∈ P ESHG:(V,E) |}.
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2270
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 2275
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2276
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2277
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2279
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2280
solution 2282
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2289

i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2292
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2293

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2297
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2298
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2299
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2304
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2312

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

.
Proof. Let 2315
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2316

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2320
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2321
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2322
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2323
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2330
Forms 2332
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2333
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2337
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2338
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2339
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2340
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2342
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2343
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2344
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2345
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2347
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2348
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2349
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2350
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2353
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2355
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2358
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2360
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2361
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2368
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2369
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2370
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2371
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2377
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2379
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2380
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2385
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2388
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2390
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2395
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2397
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2398
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2405
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2406
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2414
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2416
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2422
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2425
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2430
SuperHyperPerfect. 2438
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



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

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

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2512
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2516
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2520
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2523
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2534
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2535

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2545
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2548
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 2553
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2554
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2555
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2556
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2557
solution 2560
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2567

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2570
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2571

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2575
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2576
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2577
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2582
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2590
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2593

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2594

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2598
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2599
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2600
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2601
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2608
Forms 2610
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2611
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2615
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2616
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2617
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2618
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2620
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2621
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2622
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2623
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2625
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2626
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2627
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2628
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2631
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2633
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2638
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2639
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2641
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2646
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2647
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2648
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2655
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2657
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2663
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2666
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2668
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2673
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2675
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2676
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2683
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2684
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2692
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2694
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2700
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2703
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2708
SuperHyperTotal. 2716
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2790
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2794
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2798
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2801
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1

Then 2812
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2813
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2823
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2826
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2831
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2832
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2835
solution 2838
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2845

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2848
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2849

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2853
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2854
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2860
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2868
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2871
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2872

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2876
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2877
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2878
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2879
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2886
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2887
Forms 2888
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2889
SuperHyperConnected). 2890
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2894
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2895
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2896
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2897
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2898
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2899
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2901
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2902
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2903
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2904
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2905
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2906
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2908
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2909
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2910
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2911
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2914
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2916
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2917
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2918
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2919
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2921
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2922
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2926
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2929
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2930
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2931
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2932
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2933
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2934
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2935
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2936
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2938
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2939
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2940
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2941
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2942
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2943
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2946
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2949
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2950
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2951
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2954
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2955
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2956
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2958
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2959
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2963
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2966
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2967
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2970
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2973
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2976
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2978
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2981
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2984
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2987
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 2988
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2992
SuperHyperConnected. 3000
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 3074
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 3078
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3082
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 3085
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

Then 3096
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3097
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3107
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3110
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3115
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3116
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3119
solution 3122
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3129
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3132
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3137
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3138
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3144
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3152
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3155
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3157

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3160
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3161
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3162
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3163
17 Background 3171
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3172
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3173
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3174
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3175
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3176
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3177
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3178
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3179
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3180
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3181
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3182
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3183
results based on initial background. 3184
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3185
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3186
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3187
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3188
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3189
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3190
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3191
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3192
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3193
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3194
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3195
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3196
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3197
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3198
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3199
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3200
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3201
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3202
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3203
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3204
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3205
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3206
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3207
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3208
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3209
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3210
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3211
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3212
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3213
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3214
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3215
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3216
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3217
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3218
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3219
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3220
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3221
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by 3222
Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3223
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s 3224
Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry 3225
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3226
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic 3227
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked 3228
Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled 3229
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3230
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3231
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3232
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3233
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by 3234
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3235
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3236
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3237
“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3238
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry 3239
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3240
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3241
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3242
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3243
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3244
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3245
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3246
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3247
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3248
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3249
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 3250
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 3251
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by 3252
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3253
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by 3254
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3255
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 3256
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 3257
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3258
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3259
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor Cancer’s 3260
Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [138] by Henry Garrett 3261
(2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The Cancer’s 3262
Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set and 3263
Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [139] by Henry Garrett 3264
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3265
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3266
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [140] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3267
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks In 3268
The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3269
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [141] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3270
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3271
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [144] by 3272
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3273
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3274
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [145] by Henry 3275
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3276
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3277
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [148] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3278
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3279
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [151] by Henry 3280
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3281
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3282
in Ref. [152] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3283
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3284
Ref. [153] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3285
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [154] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3287
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3288
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [155] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic 3289
Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) 3290
SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3291
in Ref. [156] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3292
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” 3293
in Ref. [167] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries 3294
to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) 3295
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [168] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3296
and [4–168], there are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about 3297
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research 3298
books at [169–265]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3299
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [266, 267]. 3300
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3301
proposed as book in Ref. [254] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3302
Scholar and has more than 4216 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3303
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3304
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3305
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3306
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3307
proposed as book in Ref. [255] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3308
Scholar and has more than 5214 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3309
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3310
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3311
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3312
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3313
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3314
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3315
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3316
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3317
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–168] 3318
alongside scientific research books at [169–265]. Two popular scientific research books 3319
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4216 and 5214 respectively, on neutrosophic 3320
science is on [266, 267]. 3321
References 3322
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3323
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3324
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3325
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3326
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3327
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3328
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3329
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3330
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3331
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3332
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3333
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3334
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3335
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3336
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3337
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3338
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3339
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3340
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3341
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3342
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3343
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3344
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3345
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3346
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3347
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3348
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3349
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3350
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3351
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3352
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3353
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3354
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3355
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3356
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3357
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3358
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3359
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3360
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3361
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3362
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3363
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3364
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3365
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3366
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3367
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3368
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3369
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3370
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3371
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3372
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3373
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3374
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3375
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3376
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3377
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3378
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3379
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3380
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3381
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3382
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3383
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3384
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3385
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3386
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3387
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3388
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3389
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3391
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3392
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3393
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3394
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3395
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3396
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3398
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3402
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3403
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3404
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3405
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3406
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3407
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3408
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3409
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3410
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3411
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3412
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3413
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3414
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3415
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3416
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3417
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3418
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3419
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3420
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3421
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3422
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3423
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3424
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3425
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3426
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806838). 3427
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3429
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3430
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3431
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3432
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3433
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3434
10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3435
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On 3437
Super Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3438
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3439
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3440
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3443
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7796334). 3444
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3446
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3447
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3449
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3450
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3452
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3455
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7790026). 3456
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3458
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3461
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3462
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3464
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3467
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7781476). 3468
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3470
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3473
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7777857). 3474
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3476
43. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3478
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3479
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3480
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3482
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3485
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3486
46. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3487
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3488
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3489
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3491
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3494
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12400.12808). 3495
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3497
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3498
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3500
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, 3503
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3505
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3506
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3507
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3509
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3512
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3515
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3516
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3518
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3521
58. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3523
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3525
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3527
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3529
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3530
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3533
62. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3535
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3536
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3539
64. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3541
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3543
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3545
66. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3547
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3548
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3551
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3552
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3554
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3557
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3559
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3561
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3563
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3564
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3566
73. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3568
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3570
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3572
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3573
75. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3574
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3575
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3576
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3578
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3579
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3580
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3581
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3584
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3586
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3587
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super 3590
Returns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31147.52003). 3591
81. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3592
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3593
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3596
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3598
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3600
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3602
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3603
85. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3604
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3605
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3608
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3609
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3610
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3611
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3614
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3615
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3616
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3617
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3620
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3621
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3622
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3623
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3626
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3627
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3628
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3629
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3632
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3633
95. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3634
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3635
96. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3637
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3638
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3641
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3642
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3643
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3644
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3647
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3648
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3649
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3650
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3653
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3655
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3656
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super 3659
Infections”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19360.87048). 3660
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3661
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3662
105. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3664
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3665
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super 3668
Vacancy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19911.37285). 3669
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3671
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3673
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3674
109. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3676
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3677
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3679
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3680
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3681
111. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3682
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3683
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3684
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3685
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3686
113. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3688
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3689
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3690
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3691
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3692
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3693
115. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3694
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3695
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3696
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3697
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3700
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3701
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3704
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3705
118. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3706
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3708
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3709
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3712
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3713
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3716
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3717
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3718
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3719
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3720
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3721
122. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3722
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3723
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3724
123. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3725
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3726
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3727
124. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3728
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper 3729
Extensions of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3730
125. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3731
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3732
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3733
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3734
126. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3735
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3736
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3737
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3738
127. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3739
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3740
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3741
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, 3742
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3743
128. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3744
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3745
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3746
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3747
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3748
129. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3749
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3750
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3751
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3752
130. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3753
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3754
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3755
131. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3756
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3757
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3759
132. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3760
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3761
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3762
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3763
133. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3764
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3765
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3766
134. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3767
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3768
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3769
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3770
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3771
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3772
135. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3773
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3774
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3775
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3776
136. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3777
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3778
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3779
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3780
137. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3781
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3782
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3783
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3784
138. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3785
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3786
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3787
139. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3788
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3789
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3790
140. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3792
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3793
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3794
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3795
141. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3796
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3797
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3798
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3799
142. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3800
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3801
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3802
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3803
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3805
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3806
144. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3807
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3808
145. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3810
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3811
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3812
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3817
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3821
148. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3822
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3823
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3824
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3825
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3828
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3830
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3831
151. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3832
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3833
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3836
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3837
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3839
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3840
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3843
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3844
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3846
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3847
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3850
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3851
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3853
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3854
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3856
159. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3858
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3861
160. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3863
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3866
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3873
163. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3874
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3875
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3876
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3877
164. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3878
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3879
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3880
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3881
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3884
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3885
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3888
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3889
167. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3890
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3891
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3892
168. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3893
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3894
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3895
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3896
169. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3897
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7807782). 3898
170. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3899
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804449). 3900
171. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3901
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793875). 3902
172. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3903
173. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3905
174. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3907
175. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3909
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3910
176. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3911
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3912
177. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3913
178. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3915
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3916
179. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3917
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3918
180. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3919
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3920
181. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3921
182. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3923
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3924
183. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3925
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3926
184. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3927
185. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3929
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3930
186. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3931
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3932
187. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3933
188. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3935
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3936
189. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3937
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3938
190. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3939
191. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3941
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3942
192. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3943
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3944
193. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3945
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3946
194. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3947
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3948
195. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3949
196. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3951
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 3952
197. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3953
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 3954
198. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3955
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 3956
199. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3957
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 3958
200. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3959
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 3960
201. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3961
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 3962
202. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3963
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 3964
203. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3965
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 3966
204. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3967
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 3968
205. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3969
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 3970
206. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3971
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 3972
207. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3973
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 3974
208. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3975
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 3976
209. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3977
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 3978
210. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3979
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 3980
211. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3981
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 3982
212. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3983
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 3984
213. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3985
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 3986
214. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3987
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 3988
215. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3989
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 3990
216. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3991
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 3992
217. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3993
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 3994
218. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3995
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 3996
219. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3997
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 3998
220. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3999
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4000
221. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4001
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4002
222. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4003
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4004
223. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4005
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4006
224. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4007
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4008
225. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4009
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4010
226. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4011
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4012
227. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4013
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4014
228. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4015
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4016
229. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4017
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4018
230. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4019
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4020
231. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4021
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4022
232. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4023
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4024
233. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4025
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4026
234. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4027
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4028
235. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4029
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4030
236. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4031
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4032
237. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4033
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4034
238. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4035
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4036
239. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4037
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4038
240. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4039
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4040
241. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4041
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4042
242. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4043
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4044
243. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4045
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4046
244. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4047
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4048
245. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4049
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4050
246. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4051
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4052
247. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4053
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4054
248. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4055
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4056
249. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4057
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4058
250. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4059
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4060
251. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4061
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4062
252. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4063
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4064
253. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4065
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4066
254. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4067
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4068
255. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4069
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4070
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4071
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4072
257. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4073
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4074
258. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4075
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4076
259. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4077
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4078
260. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4079
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4080
261. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4081
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4082
262. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4083
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4084
263. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4085
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4086
264. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4087
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4088
265. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4089
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4090
266. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4091
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4092
267. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4093
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4094
View publication stats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · April 2023

432 PUBLICATIONS 10,906 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project

On Combinatorics View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy 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

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

Eulerian-Path-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-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 14

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 15

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 16

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

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 19

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 20

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut criteria holds 21

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

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

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and 24

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut). 25

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

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

Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 28

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 29

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and 30

cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 32

SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 33

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of 35

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 36

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 37

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 39

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 40

SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 41

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut 42

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 43

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 44

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 45

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 46

Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 47

cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 48

Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 49

Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 51

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 52

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 53

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and 54

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 55

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 56

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 57

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 58

conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 59

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut; 60

and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme 61

V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 62

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut, 63

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 64