New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/369977142
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous
Preprint · April 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7824560
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
443 PUBLICATIONS 11,959 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project
Featured Articles View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 13 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-Neighbor As Hyper 3
Nebbish On Super Nebulous 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is 10
a Eulerian-Path-Neighbor pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 14
∀N (Ea ) ∈ P : P is
a SuperHyperPath and it has
the all number of SuperHyperEdges;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 16
∀N (Ea ) ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 19
∀N (Va ) ∈ P : P is
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 21
∀N (Va ) ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23
e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 24
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). Assume 26
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 27
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 28
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 32
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 33
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive 34
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; a Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 37
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 38
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and 39
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 40
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 41
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 42
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 43
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 44
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 45
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 46
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and 47
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 48
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 49
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an 50
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 51
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 52
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 53
coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 54
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 55
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and 56
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 57
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 58
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 59
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded 63
to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either 64
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 65
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 67
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 68
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 69
conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 70
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; a 71
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 72
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 75
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 76
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 77
cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 78
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 79
an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 80
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 81
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 84
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 85
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 86
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 87
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and 88
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 89
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 90
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 93
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 94
coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 95
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 96
of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 97
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 98
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 99
Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new 100
SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and Neutrosophic 101
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut 102
for them but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, 103
and SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature 104
review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the 105
significancy of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 106
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions 107
are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with 108
different tools. The applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical 109
aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to 110
figure out the challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special 111
case is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. 112
Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. 113
These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 114
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 115
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 116
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 117
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 118
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 119
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 120
δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 121
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 122
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 123
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 124
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 125
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is a 126
maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 127
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 128
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 129
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 130
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 131
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 132
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 133
version of a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor . Since there’s more ways to get type-results 134
to make a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor more understandable. For the sake of having 135
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 136
“SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 137
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the 138
usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 139
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 140
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of 141
Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The 142
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & 143
The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 144
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of 145
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 146
“The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get 147
structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of 148
SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor . It’s the main. It’ll be 149
disciplinary to have the foundation of previous definition in the kind of 150
SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor until the 151
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then it’s officially called a “SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” 152
but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor . There are some instances about 153
the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor ”. These 154
two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the 155
disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor . For 156
the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s a need to 157
“redefine” the notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” and a 158
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 159
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 160
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 161
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the 162
intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor are redefined to a 163
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to 164
define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get 165
Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor more 166
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 167
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 168
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 169
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 170
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”, “Neutrosophic 171
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 172
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 173
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” where 174
it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the 175
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices 176
from a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor .] SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor . A graph is a 177
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 178
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 179
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 180
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 181
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 182
SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 183
all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 184
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, 185
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one 186
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 187
forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 188
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 189
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 190
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 191
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 192
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 193
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 194
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 195
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 196
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 197
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 198
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 199
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 200
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 201
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 202
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 203
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 204
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 205
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 206
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 207
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 208
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 209
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic 210
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 211
SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the longest 212
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor or the strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in those 213
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, called 214
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and the strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, called 215
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. Beyond 216
that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges 217
but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form 218
any style of a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. There isn’t any formation of any 219
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 220
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 221
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor theory, SuperHyperGraphs, 222
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 223
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 224
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 225
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 226
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 227
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 228
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 229
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 230
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 231
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 232
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 233
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 234
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 235
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 236
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 237
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 238
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 239
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 240
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 241
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 242
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 243
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 244
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 245
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 246
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 247
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 248
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 249
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 250
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 251
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 252
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 253
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 254
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 255
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 256
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 257
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 258
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 259
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 260
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 261
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 262
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 263
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 264
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 265
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 266
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 267
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 268
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 269
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 270
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 271
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 272
either the optimal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor or the Neutrosophic 273
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general 274
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic 275
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 276
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 277
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. There isn’t any formation of any 278
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 279
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 280
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 281
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” of either individual of cells or the 282
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 283
of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 284
group of cells? 285
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 286
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 287
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 288
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 289
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” on 290
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 291
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 292
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 293
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 294
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 295
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 296
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 297
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 298
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 299
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 300
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 301
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 302
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 303
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, are figured out in sections “ 304
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”. In the 305
sense of tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Path-Neighbor to make sense about 306
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 307
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 308
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 309
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. As going 310
back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 311
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 312
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 313
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 314
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 315
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 316
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 317
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”, 318
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 319
“Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 320
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 321
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 322
presented in section, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”. The keyword of this research 323
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 324
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 325
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 326
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 327
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 328
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 329
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 330
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 331
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 332
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 333
Research On the Redeemed Ways 334
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 335
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [175],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 336
Set](Ref. [175],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 337
(NSHG)](Ref. [175],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 338
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [175],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [175], 339
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 340
(NSHG)](Ref. [175],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 341
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [175],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 342
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [175],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 343
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [175]. 344
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 345
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 346
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [175],Definition 2.1,p.1). 347
Let X be a Eulerian-Path-Neighbor of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted

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

+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a
truth-membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets of 348
+
]− 0, 1 [. 349
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [175],Definition 2.2,p.2). 350
Let X be a Eulerian-Path-Neighbor of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted

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

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

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

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [175],Definition 351
2.5,p.2). 352
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 353
pair S = (V, E), where 354
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 355
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 356
1, 2, . . . , n); 357
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 358
V; 359
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 360
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 361
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 362
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 363
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 364
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 365
(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 . 366
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 367
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 368
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 369
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 370
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 371
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 372
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 373
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 374
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 375
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 376
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 377
(Ref. [175],Definition 2.7,p.3). 378
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 379
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 380
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 381
characterized as follow-up items. 382
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 383
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 384
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 385
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 386
HyperEdge; 387
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 388
SuperEdge; 389
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 390
SuperHyperEdge. 391
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 392
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 393
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [175], Definition 2.7, p.3). 394
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 395
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 396
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 397
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 398
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 399
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 400
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)). 401
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 402
pair S = (V, E), where 403
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 404
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 405
1, 2, . . . , n); 406
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 407
V; 408
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 409
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 410
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 411
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 412
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 413
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 414
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 415
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 416
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 417
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 418
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 419
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 420
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 421
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 422
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 423
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 424
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 425
(Ref. [175],Definition 2.7,p.3). 426
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 427
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 428
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 429
characterized as follow-up items. 430
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 431
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 432
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 433
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 434
HyperEdge; 435
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 436
SuperEdge; 437
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 438
SuperHyperEdge. 439
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 440
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 441
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 442
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 443
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 444
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 445
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 446
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 447
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 448
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 449
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 450
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 451
given SuperHyperEdges; 452
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 453
SuperHyperEdges; 454
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 455
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 456
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 457
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 458
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 459
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 460
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 461
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 462
common SuperVertex. 463
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 464
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 465
of following conditions hold: 466
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 467
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 468
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 475
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 476
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 477
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. 478
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 479
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 480
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 481
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 482
SuperHyperPath . 483
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 484
(Ref. [175],Definition 5.3,p.7). 485
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 486
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 487
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 488
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 489
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 490
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 491
(NSHE)). (Ref. [175],Definition 5.4,p.7). 492
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 493
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 494
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 495
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 496
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 497
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 498
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 499
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 501
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 502
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 504
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 505
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 506
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 507
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 508
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). 509
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 511
either V 0 or E 0 is called 512
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 513
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 514
∀N (Ea ) ∈ P : P is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 515
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 516
∀N (Ea ) ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 517
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 518
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 519
∀N (Va ) ∈ P : P is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 520
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 521
∀N (Va ) ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 522
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 523
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 526
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). 527
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 530
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 534
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 535
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 536
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 537
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 538
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 539
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 542
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 543
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 544
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 545
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 548
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 549
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 552
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 553
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 554
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 555
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 556
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 557
its Extreme coefficient; 558
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 559
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 560
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 563
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 564
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 565
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 566
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 567
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic 568
power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 569
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 570
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 574
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 575
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 576
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 577
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of 579
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 580
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 583
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 584
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 588
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 594
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 597
its Extreme coefficient; 598
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 599
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
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 605
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic 608
power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 609
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). 610
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 611
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 612
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor such that either of the following expressions hold for 613
the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 614
|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 615
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 616
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of 617
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor such that either of the following 618
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 619
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 620
|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. 621
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 622
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 623
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s a need to 624
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 625
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 626
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 627
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 628
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 629
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 630
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 631
understandable. 632
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 633
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 634
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 635

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 636
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 637
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 638
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 639
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 640
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 641
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 642
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor more Neutrosophicly understandable. 643
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s a need to 644
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”. 645
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 646
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 647
assign to the values. 648
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. It’s redefined a 649
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the Table (3) holds. 650
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 651
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 652
Forms 653
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 654
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is 656
called Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is 657
called Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic 658
probability of A. 659
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 660
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 662
Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 663
s-independent criteria 664
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 665
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 666
criteria 667
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 668
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Any k-function Eulerian-Path-Neighbor like E is 670
called Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Eulerian-Path-Neighbor like 671
E is called Neutrosophic Variable. 672
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 673
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 674
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 676
number is called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 677
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 678
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 679
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A Neutrosophic number is called 681
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 682
Crossing criteria 683
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 684
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let m and n propose 685
special Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then with m ≥ 4n, 686
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 687
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 688
Neutrosophic independently with probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor p := 4n/m, and set 689
H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 690
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: 691
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
692
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 693
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let P be a 694
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of 695
SuperHyperLines
√ in the plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 696
1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 697
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 698
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive 699
points on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 700
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 701
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 702
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 703
2 3
again l < 32n /k . 704
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let P be a 706
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P 707
at unit SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 708
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 709
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 710
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 711
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 712
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
713
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 714
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints 715
on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 716
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 717
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 718
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 719
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 720
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 721
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 722
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 723
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 724
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let X be a nonnegative 725
Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 726
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. 727
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 728
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let Xn be a 729
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 730
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 731
Proof. 732
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A special 734
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 735
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A special SuperHyperGraph in 737
Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 738
SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 739
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 740
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 741
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 742
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 743
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 744
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 745
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 746
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: 747
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 748
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 749
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 750
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 751
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 752
stability number at most k. 753
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 754
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 756
number is called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called 757
Neutrosophic Variance criteria 758
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let X be a 760
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 761
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let X be a Neutrosophic 763
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 764
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ 2
= .
t t2
765
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let Xn be a 767
Neutrosophic Variable in a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 768
and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 769
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| 771
in Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that 772
E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| 773
when Xn = 0. 774
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 776
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 777
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 778
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 779
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. As in the proof of related 781
Theorem, the result is straightforward. 782
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let 784
f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 785
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 786
or 787
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 788
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 790
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 791
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let P be a monotone property of 793
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 794
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 795
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 796
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 797
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 798
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 800
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 801
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 802
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let F be a nonempty 804
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 805
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 806
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 807
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 809
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 810
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 811
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 812
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is 813
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 814
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 815
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 816
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 817
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 818
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 819
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 820
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 821
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
822
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 825
SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms 826
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic 827
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is 828
Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it 829
as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is 830
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 831

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + z.
832
Neutrosophicly straightforward. 835

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
836




= {E1 }.
= z3.
= {V3 }.
= z2.
840

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
844


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
848

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
852




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
856

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
860


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
864

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

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

(16.3)

(16.3)
868

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
872

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
876

= {E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 2 .
= {V1 }.
= z5.
880

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
884

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
888

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
892

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
896

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
900

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

(16.3)
904

= {E1 , E2 }.
= z 10 + z 2 .
= {V2 ({R}, {M6 }, {L6 }, {F }, {P }, {J}, {M }), V1 , V3 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + 7z.
908

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
912
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 913
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 914
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 915
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 916
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 917
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 918
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 919
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 920
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 921
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor minus all Neutrosophic 922
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 923
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 924
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, minus all 925
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 926
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-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 927
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 928
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of 929
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 930
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 931
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor in some 932
cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 933
Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic 934
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 935
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor with the least Neutrosophic 936
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 937
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 938
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 939
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the 940
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is the 941
cardinality of 942

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP 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-Neighbor 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-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp

bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor.
It’s the contradiction to that fact on the generality. There are some counterexamples to
deny this statement. One of them comes from the setting of the graph titled path and
cycle as the counterexamples-classes or reversely direction star as the examples-classes,
are well-known classes in that setting and they could be considered as the
examples-classes and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
Let V \ V \ {z} in mind. There’s no necessity on the SuperHyperEdge since we need at 943
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 944
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 945
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 946
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 947
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 948
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 949
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 950
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor. 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-Neighbor has the Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge.
Thus, a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor 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-Neighbor” 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-Neighbor 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-Neighbor for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 951
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 952
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 953
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 954
free-quasi-triangle. 955
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-Neighbor. Those Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor.
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-Neighbor is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor.

E
Let 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, 956
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
957
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor,
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-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 958
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 959
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 960
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 961
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 962
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor in 963
some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 964
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 965
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 966
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 967
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 968
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 969
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 970
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 971
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 972
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 973
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 974
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 975
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 976
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 977
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor where the 978
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, 979
a Neutrosophic embedded R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 980
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 981
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 982
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 983
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 984
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 985
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The 986
interior types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the 987
Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior 988
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 989
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any 990
distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic 991
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only 992
in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with 993
the interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 994
In the embedded Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s the usage of exterior 995
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than 996
outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One 997
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic 998
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement 999
has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic 1000
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the exclusion of the 1001
exclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1002
and with other terms, the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the inclusion of all 1003
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a 1004
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 1005
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic 1006
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct 1007
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Neutrosophic 1008
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them 1009
but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Neutrosophic 1010
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 1011
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, minus all 1012
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1013
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor has two titles. a 1014
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and its corresponded quasi-maximum 1015
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 1016
any Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with that 1017
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 1018
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1019
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1020
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbors for all Neutrosophic 1021
numbers less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 1022
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the 1023
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, again and more in the operations of collecting 1024
all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbors acted on the all possible used formations 1025
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. This 1026
Neutrosophic number is 1027
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbors. 1028
Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor be 1029
a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic 1030
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1031
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1032
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1033
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1034
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1035
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor =
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number |
= max zNeutrosophic Number }.
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Neutrosophic 1036
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor poses the upcoming expressions. 1037
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1038
= max zNeutrosophic Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1039

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1040
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1041
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1042

1043

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1044
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1045
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1046
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1047
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” but, precisely, it’s the 1048
generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” since “Neutrosophic 1049
Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” happens “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” in a Neutrosophic 1050
SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but “Neutrosophic 1051
SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” in a 1052
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background 1053
since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise 1054
from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 1055
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor”, and “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” are up. 1056
Thus, let 1057
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1058
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1059
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and the new terms are 1060
up. 1061
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1062
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1063
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1064
And with go back to initial structure, 1065
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1066
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1067

1068

Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1069
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 1070
if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1071
some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic 1072
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic 1073
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1074
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1075
are coming up. 1076
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

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

The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1077
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1078
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1079
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1080
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1081
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor is
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 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-Neighbor 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-Neighbor. 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-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1082
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1083
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1084
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1085
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and it’s an Neutrosophic 1086
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since it’s 1087
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-Neighbor.
There isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1088
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1089
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1090
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1091
“Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” 1092
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1093
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, 1094
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-Neighbor amid those
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor,
are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1095
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-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower

sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is the cardinality
of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1096
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1097
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 1098
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 1099
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 1100
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1101
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1103
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1104
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1105
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1106
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1107
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 1108
Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1109
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1110
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1111
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1112
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1113
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since it doesn’t have 1114
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1116
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1117
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1118
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1119
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic 1120
procedure such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some 1121
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic 1122
SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic 1123
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its 1124
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the 1125
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. 1126
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic 1127
SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. 1128
Thus the obvious Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, VESHE is up. The obvious simple 1129
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, VESHE , is a 1130
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic 1131
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled 1132
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1133
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1134
SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1135
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1136
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1137
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1138
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1139
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1140
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1141
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1142
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1143
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1144
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1145
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1146
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, is up. There’s neither empty 1147
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1148
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1149
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The 1150
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1151

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor . 1152
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1153
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1154

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1155
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1156
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1158
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1159
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1160
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1161
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1162
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic 1163
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic 1164
SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1165

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic 1167
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1168
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic 1169
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1170

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1171
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1172

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1174
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1175
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1176
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1177
called the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and it’s an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1178
Since it’s 1179
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1181
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1182
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1183
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1184
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1185

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor , 1186

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1187
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor , not: 1188

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1189

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1190
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1191
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1192
“Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ” 1193
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1194
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Path-Neighbor , 1195
is only and only 1196

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1197
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1198
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1199
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1200
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1201
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1202
Then 1203

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1204
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1205
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 1206
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1207
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 1208
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. The 1209
latter is straightforward. 1210
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1211
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1212
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1213
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1214
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Example (16.5)
Then 1215

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1216
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1217
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 1218
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1219

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1223
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1224
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1225
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1227
Then 1228

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1229
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1230
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1231
There’s a new way to redefine as 1232

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1236
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1237
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1238
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1239
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic 1240
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1242
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1243

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1244
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1245
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 1246
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1247

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1250
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1251
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1252
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1253
the 1254
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1255
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1256
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1257
solution 1258
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1259
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1260
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1261
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1262
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1263
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1264
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1265
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1266
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1267

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1268
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
1269
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 1271

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1274
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1275
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1276
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1277
the 1278
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1279
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1280
solution 1282
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1284
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1285
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1286
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1287
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1288
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1289
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1290
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1291
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 1292

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {CEN T ER}.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG | .
Proof. Let 1293
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1294
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1296

Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Neutrosophic
Example (16.15)
latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Thus 1299
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1300
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor could be applied. The unique embedded 1301
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor proposes some longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1302
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1303
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1305
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1306
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1307
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1308
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1310
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1311
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and 1312
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. 1313
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1314
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1315
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1316
N eutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian − P ath − N eighbor =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − P ath − N eighborof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − P ath − N eighbor
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−P ath−N eighbor. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1317
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1318
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1319
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1320
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and 1321
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor coincide. 1322
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1324
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1325
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1327
strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if and only if it’s a longest 1328
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1330
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1331
its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and reversely. 1332
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 1333
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1334
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic 1335
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and reversely. 1336
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1337
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1338
isn’t well-defined. 1339
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1340
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1341
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1342
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1344
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1345
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1346
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1347
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1348
well-defined. 1349
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1350
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1351
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined. 1352
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1354
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1355
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined. 1356
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1357
is 1358
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1359
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1360
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1361
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1362
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1363
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1364
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1365
∅ is 1366
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1367
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1368
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1369
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1370
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1371
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1372
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1373
independent SuperHyperSet is 1374
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1375
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1376
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1377
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1378
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1379
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1380
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1381
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1382
maximal 1383
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1384
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1385
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1386
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1387
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1388
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1389
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1390
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1391
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1392
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1393
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1394
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1395
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1396
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1397
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1398
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1399
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1401
number of 1402
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1403
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1404
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1405
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1406
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1407
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1408
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1409
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1410
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1412
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1413
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1414
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1415
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1416
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1417
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1418
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1419
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1422
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1423
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1424
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1425
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1429
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1430
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1431
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1434
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1435
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1436
is a 1437
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1441
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1442
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1443
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1446
number of 1447
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1451
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1452
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1453
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1454
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1455
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1456
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1458
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1459
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1463
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1464
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1465
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1466
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1467
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1468
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1469
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1470
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1474
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1476
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1478
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1479
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1483
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1484
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1485
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1487
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1489
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1490
of a dual 1491
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1495
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1496
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1497
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1499
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1500
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1501
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1507
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1508
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1509
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1510
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1511
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1512
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1513
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S 1514
such that 1515
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1516
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1517
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1518
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then 1519
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor set; 1520
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1521
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1522
Then 1523
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1524
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1525
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1526
which is connected. Then 1527
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1528
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1529
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1530
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1531
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1533
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1534
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1535
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1536
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1537
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1538
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1540
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1541
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1542
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1543
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1544
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1545
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1546
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1548
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1549
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1550
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1551
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1553
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1554
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1556
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1557
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1558
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1560
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1561
(ii) Γ = 1; 1562
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1563
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1564
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1565
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1566
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1567
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1568
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1569
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1570
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1571
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1572
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1573
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1575
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1576
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1577
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1579
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1580
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1582
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 1583
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1584
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1586
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1587
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1588
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF; 1589
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1590
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1591
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1592
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1593
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1594
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1595
SuperHyperSet. Then 1596
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1597
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF; 1598
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1599

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1600
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1601
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1602
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1603
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1604
SuperHyperSet. Then 1605
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1606
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E); 1607
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1608

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1609
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1610
for N SHF : (V, E). 1611
Then following statements hold; 1613
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1614
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is an 1615
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1616
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1617
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1618
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1619
Then following statements hold; 1621
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1622
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is an 1623
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1624
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1625
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1626
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1627
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1628
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1629
statements hold; 1630
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1631
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1632
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1633
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1635
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1637
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1638
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1639
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1640
statements hold; 1641
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1642
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1644
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1646
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1648
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1649
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1651
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1652
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1653
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1655
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1657
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1660
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1662
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1663
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1664
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1666
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1668
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1669
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1671
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1673
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1674
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1675
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1677
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1679
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1682
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1684
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1685
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1686
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1688
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1690
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1693
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1694
Neutrosophic Recognition 1695
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1696
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1697
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1698
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1699
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1700
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1701
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1702
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1703
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1704
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1705
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1706
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1707
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1708
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1709
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1710
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1711
happened and what’s done. 1712
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1713
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1714
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1715
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1716
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 1717
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1718
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor or the Neutrosophic 1719
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic 1720
SuperHyperModels. 1721
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1722
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1723
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1724
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1725
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1726
featured. 1727
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1728
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1729
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1730
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1731
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1732
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

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

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

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1734
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1735
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1736
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1737
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1738
Neutrosophic featured. 1739
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1740
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1741
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1742
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1743
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1744
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1746
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1747
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1748
The SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1749
are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1750
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1751
recognitions? 1752
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1753
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor? 1754
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1755
compute them? 1756
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1757
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor? 1758
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic 1759
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1760
they’re based on SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, are there else? 1761
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1762
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1763
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1764
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1765
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1766
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1767
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1768
highlighted. 1769
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1770
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1771
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition 1772
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. 1773
Based on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new 1774
SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, finds the convenient 1775
background to implement some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and 1776
some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of 1777
the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s 1778
mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the 1779
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, the new SuperHyperClasses and 1780
SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on 1781
the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1782
The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. 1783
In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1784
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 1785
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1786
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1787
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1788
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1789
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1790
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1791
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1792
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this 1793
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1794
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1795
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1796
Forms 1797
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1798
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1802
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1803
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1804
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1805
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1806
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1807
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1808
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1809
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1810
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1811
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1812
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1813
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1814
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1815
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1818
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1820
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1821
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1822
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1823
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1825
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1826
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1829
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1830
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1833
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1834
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1835
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1836
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1839
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1840
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1841
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1842
Extreme coefficient; 1843
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1844
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1845
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1847
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1848
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1849
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1853
Neutrosophic coefficient; 1854
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1855
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 1860
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1862
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1863
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1867
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1870
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1871
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1876
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1877
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1879
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1881
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1890
Neutrosophic coefficient. 1891
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1895
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1896
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1897
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1898
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1899
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1900
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1901
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1902
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.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 1905
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1906
SuperHyperDuality. 1911

straightforward. 1914

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 1974
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1975
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 1976
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 1980
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1984
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1985
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1986
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 1987
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1998
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 1999
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2009
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 2012
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 2017
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2018
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2019
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2020
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2021
solution 2024
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2031

= {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 2034
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2035

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2041
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2046
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2054
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 2057
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 2058
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2059

∃!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 2064
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2065
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2072
Forms 2074
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2075
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2079
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2080
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2081
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2082
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2084
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2085
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2086
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2087
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2089
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2090
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2091
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2092
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2095
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2096
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2097
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2098
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2099
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2100
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2102
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2103
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2105
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2106
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2110
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2111
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2112
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2113
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2114
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2119
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2121
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 2124
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 2125
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2126
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2127
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2130
coefficient; 2131
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2132
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2135
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2136
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2137
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2139
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2140
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2147
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2148
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2156
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2158
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2164
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2167
coefficient. 2168
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2172
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2173
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2174
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2175
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2176
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2177
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 2178
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 2179
SuperHyperJoin. 2180
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 2254
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2258
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2262

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

.
Proof. Let 2265
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2276
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 2277

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2287
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 2290
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 2295
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2296
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2297
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2299
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2300
solution 2302
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2309

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 2312
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2313

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2317
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2318
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2319
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2324
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2332

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

.
Proof. Let 2335
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2336

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2340
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2341
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2342
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2343
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2350
Forms 2352
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2353
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2357
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2358
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2359
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2360
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2362
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2363
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2364
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2365
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2367
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2368
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2369
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2370
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2373
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2375
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2378
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2380
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2381
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2388
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2389
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2390
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2391
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2397
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2399
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2400
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2408
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2410
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2415
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2417
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2418
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2425
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2426
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2434
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2436
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2445
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2450
SuperHyperPerfect. 2458
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 2532
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2536
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2540
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 2543
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2554
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2555

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2565
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 2568
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 2573
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2574
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2575
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2576
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2577
solution 2580
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2587

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 2590
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2591

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2595
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2596
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2597
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2602
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2610
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2613

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2614

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2618
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2619
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2620
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2621
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2628
Forms 2630
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2631
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2635
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2636
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2637
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2638
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2640
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2641
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2642
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2643
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2645
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2646
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2647
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2648
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2651
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2653
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2656
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2658
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2659
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2661
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2666
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2667
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2668
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2675
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2677
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2683
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2686
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2688
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2693
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2695
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2696
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2703
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2704
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2712
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2714
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2720
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2723
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2728
SuperHyperTotal. 2736
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 2810
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2814
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2818
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 2821
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 2832
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 2833
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2843
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 2846
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2851
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2852
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2855
solution 2858
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2865

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 2868
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2869

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2873
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2874
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2880
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2888
∗
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 2891
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2892

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2896
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2897
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2898
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2899
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2906
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2907
Forms 2908
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2909
SuperHyperConnected). 2910
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2914
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2915
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2916
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2917
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2918
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2919
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2921
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2922
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2923
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2924
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2925
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2926
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2928
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2929
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2930
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2931
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2934
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2936
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2937
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2938
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2939
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2941
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2942
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2949
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2950
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2951
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2952
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2953
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2954
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2955
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2956
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2957
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2958
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2959
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2960
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2961
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2962
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2963
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2966
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2969
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2970
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2971
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2974
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2975
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2976
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2978
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2979
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2983
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2986
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2987
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2990
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2993
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2996
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2998
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3001
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3004
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3007
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3008
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3012
SuperHyperConnected. 3020
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 3094
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 3098
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3102
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 3105
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 3116
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 3117
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3127
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 3130
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3135
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3136
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3139
solution 3142
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3149
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 3152
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3157
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3158
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3164
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3172
∗
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 3175
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3177

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3180
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3181
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3182
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3183
17 Background 3191
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3192
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3193
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3194
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3195
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3196
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3197
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3198
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3199
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3200
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3201
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3202
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3203
results based on initial background. 3204
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3205
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3206
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3207
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3208
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3209
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3210
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3211
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3212
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3213
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3214
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3215
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3216
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3217
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3218
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3219
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3220
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3221
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3222
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3223
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3224
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3225
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3226
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3227
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3228
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3229
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3230
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3231
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3232
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3233
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3234
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3235
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3236
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3237
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3238
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3239
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3240
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3241
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by 3242
Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3243
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s 3244
Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry 3245
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3246
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic 3247
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked 3248
Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled 3249
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3250
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3251
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3252
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3253
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by 3254
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3255
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3256
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3257
“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3258
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry 3259
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3260
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3261
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3262
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3263
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3264
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3265
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3266
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3267
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3268
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3269
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 3270
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 3271
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by 3272
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3273
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by 3274
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3275
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 3276
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 3277
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3278
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3279
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor Cancer’s 3280
Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [145] by Henry Garrett 3281
(2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The Cancer’s 3282
Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set and 3283
Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [146] by Henry Garrett 3284
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3285
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3286
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [147] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3287
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks In 3288
The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3289
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [148] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3290
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3291
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [151] by 3292
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3293
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3294
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [152] by Henry 3295
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3296
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3297
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [155] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3298
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3299
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [158] by Henry 3300
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3301
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3302
in Ref. [159] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3303
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3304
Ref. [160] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3305
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [161] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3307
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3308
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [162] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic 3309
Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) 3310
SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3311
in Ref. [163] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3312
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” 3313
in Ref. [174] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries 3314
to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) 3315
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [175] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3316
and [4–175], there are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about 3317
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research 3318
books at [176–276]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3319
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [277, 278]. 3320
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3321
proposed as book in Ref. [265] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3322
Scholar and has more than 4276 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3323
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3324
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3325
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3326
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3327
proposed as book in Ref. [266] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3328
Scholar and has more than 5274 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3329
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3330
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3331
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3332
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3333
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3334
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3335
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3336
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3337
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–175] 3338
alongside scientific research books at [176–276]. Two popular scientific research books 3339
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4276 and 5274 respectively, on neutrosophic 3340
science is on [277, 278]. 3341
References 3342
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3343
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3344
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3345
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3346
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3347
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3348
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3349
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3350
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3351
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3352
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3353
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3354
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3355
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3356
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3357
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3358
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3359
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3360
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3361
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3362
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3363
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3364
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3365
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3366
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3367
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3368
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3369
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3370
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3371
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3372
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3373
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3374
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3375
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3376
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3377
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3378
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3379
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3380
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3381
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3382
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3383
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3384
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3385
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3386
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3387
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3388
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3389
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3390
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3391
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3392
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3393
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3394
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3395
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3396
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3397
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3398
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3399
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3400
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3401
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3402
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3403
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3404
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3405
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3406
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3407
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3408
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3409
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3411
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3412
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3413
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3414
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3415
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3416
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3418
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3422
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3423
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3424
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3425
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3426
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3427
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3428
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3429
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3430
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3431
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3432
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3433
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3434
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3435
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3436
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3437
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3438
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3439
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3440
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3441
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3442
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3443
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819531). 3444
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3445
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3446
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819579). 3447
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3449
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3450
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3452
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3453
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3455
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3456
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3457
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3458
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3461
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809328). 3462
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3464
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3465
33. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3466
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3467
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3470
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3471
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3472
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3474
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3475
10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3476
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On 3478
Super Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3479
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3480
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3481
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3484
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7796334). 3485
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3487
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3488
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3490
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3491
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3493
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3496
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7790026). 3497
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3499
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3502
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3503
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3505
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3508
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3511
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3514
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3517
50. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3519
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3520
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3521
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3523
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3526
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3527
53. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3528
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3529
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3530
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3532
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3535
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12400.12808). 3536
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3538
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3539
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3541
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, 3544
59. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3546
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3547
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3548
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3550
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3553
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3556
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3557
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3559
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3562
65. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3564
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3566
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3568
67. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3570
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3571
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3574
69. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3576
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3577
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3580
71. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3582
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3584
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3586
73. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3588
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3589
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3592
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3593
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3595
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3598
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3600
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3602
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3604
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3605
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3607
80. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3609
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3611
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3613
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3614
82. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3615
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3616
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3617
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3619
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3620
84. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3621
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3622
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3625
86. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3627
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3628
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super 3631
Returns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31147.52003). 3632
88. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3633
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3634
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3637
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3639
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3641
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3643
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3644
92. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3645
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3646
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3649
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3650
94. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3651
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3652
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3655
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3656
96. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3657
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3658
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3661
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3662
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3663
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3664
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3667
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3668
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3669
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3670
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3673
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3674
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3675
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3676
103. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3678
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3679
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3682
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3683
105. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3684
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3685
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3688
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3689
107. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3690
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3691
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3694
109. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3696
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3697
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super 3700
Infections”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19360.87048). 3701
111. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3702
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3703
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3705
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3706
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super 3709
Vacancy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19911.37285). 3710
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3712
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3714
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3715
116. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3717
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3718
117. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3720
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3721
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3722
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3723
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3724
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3725
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3726
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3727
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3729
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3730
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3731
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3732
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3733
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3734
122. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3735
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3736
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3737
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3738
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3741
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3742
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3745
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3746
125. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3747
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3749
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3750
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3753
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3754
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3757
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3758
128. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3759
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3760
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3761
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3762
129. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3763
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3764
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3765
130. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3766
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3767
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3768
131. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3769
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper 3770
Extensions of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3771
132. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3772
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3773
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3774
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3775
133. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3776
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3777
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3778
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3779
134. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3780
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3781
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3782
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, 3783
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3784
135. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3785
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3786
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3787
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3788
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3789
136. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3790
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3791
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3792
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3793
137. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3794
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3795
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3796
138. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3797
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3798
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3800
139. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3801
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3802
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3803
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3804
140. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3805
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3806
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3807
141. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3808
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3809
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3810
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3811
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3812
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3813
142. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3814
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3815
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3816
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3817
143. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3818
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3819
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3820
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3821
144. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3822
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3823
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3824
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3825
145. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3826
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3827
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3828
146. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3829
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3830
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3831
147. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3833
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3834
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3835
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3836
148. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3837
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3838
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3839
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3840
149. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3841
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3842
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3843
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3844
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3846
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3847
151. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3848
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3849
152. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3851
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3852
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3853
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3858
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3862
155. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3863
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3864
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3865
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3866
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3869
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3871
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3872
158. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3873
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3874
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3877
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3878
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3880
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3881
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3884
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3885
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3887
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3888
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3891
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3892
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3894
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3895
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3897
166. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3899
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3902
167. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3904
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3907
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3914
170. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3915
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3916
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3917
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3918
171. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3919
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3920
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3921
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3922
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3925
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3926
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3929
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3930
174. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3931
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3932
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3933
175. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3934
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3935
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3936
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3937
176. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3938
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7820680). 3939
177. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3940
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 3941
178. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3942
179. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In 3944
SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 3945
180. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3946
181. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3948
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804449). 3949
182. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3950
183. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3952
184. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3954
185. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3956
186. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3958
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3959
187. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3960
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3961
188. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3962
189. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3964
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3965
190. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3966
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3967
191. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3968
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3969
192. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3970
193. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3972
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3973
194. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3974
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3975
195. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3976
196. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3978
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3979
197. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3980
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3981
198. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3982
199. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3984
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3985
200. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3986
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3987
201. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3988
202. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3990
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3991
203. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3992
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3993
204. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3994
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3995
205. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3996
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3997
206. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3998
207. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4000
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4001
208. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4002
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4003
209. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4004
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4005
210. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4006
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4007
211. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4008
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4009
212. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4010
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4011
213. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4012
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4013
214. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4014
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4015
215. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4016
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4017
216. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4018
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4019
217. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4020
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4021
218. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4022
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4023
219. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4024
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4025
220. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4026
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4027
221. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4028
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4029
222. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4030
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4031
223. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4032
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4033
224. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4034
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4035
225. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4036
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4037
226. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4038
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4039
227. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4040
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4041
228. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4042
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4043
229. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4044
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4045
230. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4046
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4047
231. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4048
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4049
232. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4050
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4051
233. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4052
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4053
234. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4054
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4055
235. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4056
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4057
236. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4058
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4059
237. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4060
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4061
238. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4062
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4063
239. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4064
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4065
240. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4066
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4067
241. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4068
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4069
242. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4070
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4071
243. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4072
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4073
244. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4074
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4075
245. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4076
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4077
246. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4078
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4079
247. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4080
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4081
248. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4082
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4083
249. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4084
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4085
250. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4086
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4087
251. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4088
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4089
252. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4090
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4091
253. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4092
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4093
254. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4094
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4095
255. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4096
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4097
256. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4098
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4099
257. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4100
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4101
258. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4102
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4103
259. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4104
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4105
260. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4106
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4107
261. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4108
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4109
262. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4110
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4111
263. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4112
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4113
264. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4114
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4115
265. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4116
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4117
266. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4118
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4119
267. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4120
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4121
268. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4122
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4123
269. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4124
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4125
270. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4126
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4127
271. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4128
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4129
272. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4130
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4131
273. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4132
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4133
274. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4134
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4135
275. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4136
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4137
276. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4138
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4139
277. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4140
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4141
278. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4142
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4143
View publication stats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · April 2023

443 PUBLICATIONS 11,959 CITATIONS

Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project

Featured Articles View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper 3

Nebbish On Super Nebulous 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

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

a Eulerian-Path-Neighbor pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 14

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 16

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

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

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 19

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 21

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

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 24

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 25

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). Assume 26

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

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

Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 30

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 31

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 32

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

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

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35

that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; a Neutrosophic 36

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 37

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 38

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and 39

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 40

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 41

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 42

SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 43

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 44

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 45

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 46

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and 47

C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 48

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 49

number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an 50

Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 51

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 53

coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 54

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 55

re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and 56

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 57

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 58

the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 59

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 60