New Ideas On Super Nebulous by Hyper Nebbish of Eulerian-Path-Neighbor in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/369976979
New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In

Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph
Preprint · April 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7824623
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
444 PUBLICATIONS 12,068 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Fuzzy Logic View project
Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs 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 On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 2
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With 3
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
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 cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 60
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 61
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 62
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 “Extreme 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 “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 248
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 Extreme 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
Extreme 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
Extreme SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 271
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 272
either the optimal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor or the Extreme 273
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in those Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general results 274
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme SuperHyperPath 275
s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least 276
three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. There isn’t 277
any formation of any SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of 278
any SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 279
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 280
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” of either individual of cells or the 281
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 282
of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 283
group of cells? 284
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 285
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 286
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 287
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 288
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” and “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” on 289
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken 290
more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this 291
SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 292
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 293
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 294
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 295
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 296
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 297
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are 298
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 299
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 300
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 301
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 302
and Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, are figured out in sections “ 303
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” and “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”. In the sense 304
of tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Path-Neighbor to make sense about continuing 305
the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Extreme SuperHyperUniform are 306
introduced and as their consequences, corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out 307
to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 308
“Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there 309
are some smart steps toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new 310
frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph, in the sections 311
“Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. The 312
starter research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing 313
section of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some 314
general SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 315
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 316
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”, “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”, “Results on 317
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious 318
questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about 319
excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description 320
and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”. 321
The keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” 322
with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite 323
as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 324
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 325
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 326
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 327
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 328
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 329
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 330
3 Extreme Preliminaries Of This Scientific 331
Research On the Redeemed Ways 332
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 333
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [176],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 334
Set](Ref. [176],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 335
(NSHG)](Ref. [176],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 336
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [176],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [176], 337
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 338
(NSHG)](Ref. [176],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 339
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [176],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 340
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [176],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 341
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [176]. 342
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 343
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 344
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [176],Definition 2.1,p.1). 345
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 346
+
]− 0, 1 [. 347
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [176],Definition 2.2,p.2). 348
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. [176],Definition 349
2.5,p.2). 350
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 351
pair S = (V, E), where 352
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 353
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 354
1, 2, . . . , n); 355
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 356
V; 357
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 358
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 359
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 360
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 361
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 362
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 363
(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 . 364
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 365
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 366
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 367
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 368
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 369
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 370
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 371
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 372
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 373
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 374
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 375
(Ref. [176],Definition 2.7,p.3). 376
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 377
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 378
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 379
characterized as follow-up items. 380
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 381
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 382
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 383
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 384
HyperEdge; 385
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 386
SuperEdge; 387
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 388
SuperHyperEdge. 389
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 390
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 391
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [176], Definition 2.7, p.3). 392
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 393
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 394
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 395
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 396
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 397
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 398
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)). 399
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 400
pair S = (V, E), where 401
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 402
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 403
1, 2, . . . , n); 404
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 405
V; 406
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 407
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 408
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 409
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 410
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 411
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ). 412
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 413
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 414
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 415
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 416
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 417
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 418
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 419
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 420
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 421
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 422
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 423
(Ref. [176],Definition 2.7,p.3). 424
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 425
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 426
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 427
characterized as follow-up items. 428
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 429
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 430
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 431
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 432
HyperEdge; 433
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 434
SuperEdge; 435
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 436
SuperHyperEdge. 437
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 438
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 439
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 440
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 441
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 442
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 443
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 444
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 445
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 446
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 447
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 448
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 449
given SuperHyperEdges; 450
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 451
SuperHyperEdges; 452
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 453
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 454
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 455
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 456
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 457
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 458
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 459
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 460
common SuperVertex. 461
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 462
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 463
of following conditions hold: 464
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 465
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 466
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 467
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 468
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 473
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 474
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 475
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. 476
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 477
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 478
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 479
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 480
SuperHyperPath . 481
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 482
(Ref. [176],Definition 5.3,p.7). 483
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 484
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 485
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 486
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 487
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 488
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 489
(NSHE)). (Ref. [176],Definition 5.4,p.7). 490
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 491
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 492
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 493
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 494
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 495
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 496
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 497
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 499
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 500
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 502
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 503
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 504
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 505
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 506
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). 507
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 509
either V 0 or E 0 is called 510
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 511
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 512
∀N (Ea ) ∈ P : P is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 513
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 514
∀N (Ea ) ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 515
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 516
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 517
∀N (Va ) ∈ P : P is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the following expression is 518
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor criteria holds 519
∀N (Va ) ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 520
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 521
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 524
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). 525
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 527
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 528
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 532
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 533
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 534
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 535
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 536
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 537
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 540
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 541
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 542
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 543
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 546
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 547
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 550
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 551
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 552
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 553
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 554
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 555
its Extreme coefficient; 556
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 557
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 558
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 561
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 562
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 563
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 564
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 565
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic 566
power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 567
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 568
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 573
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 574
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if it’s either of 577
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 578
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 581
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 582
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 583
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 586
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 592
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 595
its Extreme coefficient; 596
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 597
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 601
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 602
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 603
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 604
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 605
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic 606
power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 607
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor). 608
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 609
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 610
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor such that either of the following expressions hold for 611
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
the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 612
|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 613
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 614
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of 615
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor such that either of the following 616
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 617
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 618
|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. 619
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 620
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 621
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s a need to 622
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 623
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 624
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 625
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 626
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 627
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 628
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 629
understandable. 630
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 631
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 632
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 633
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 634
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 635
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 636
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 637
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 638
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 639
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 640
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor more Neutrosophicly understandable. 641
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s a need to 642
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor”. 643

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 644
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 645
assign to the values. 646
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. It’s redefined a 647
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if the Table (3) holds. 648
4 Extreme SuperHyper But As The

Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 649
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 650
Forms 651
Definition 4.1. (Extreme event). 652
Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 653
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Any Extreme k-subset of A of V is called 654
Extreme k-event and if k = 2, then Extreme subset of A of V is called Extreme 655
event. The following expression is called Extreme probability of A. 656
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Extreme Independent). 657
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. s Extreme k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 659
Extreme s-independent if the following expression is called Extreme 660
s-independent criteria 661
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Extreme k-events of A and B is called Extreme independent. 662
The following expression is called Extreme independent criteria 663
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Extreme Variable). 664
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Any k-function Eulerian-Path-Neighbor like E is 666
called Extreme k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Eulerian-Path-Neighbor like E is 667
called Extreme Variable. 668
The notion of independent on Extreme Variable is likewise. 669
Definition 4.4. (Extreme Expectation). 670
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A Extreme k-Variable E has a number is 672
called Extreme Expectation if the following expression is called Extreme 673
Expectation criteria 674
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Extreme Crossing). 675
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A Extreme number is called Extreme 677
Crossing if the following expression is called Extreme Crossing criteria 678
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 679
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let m and n propose special 680
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then with m ≥ 4n, 681
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a Extreme 682
random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G Extreme 683
independently with probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] and 684
H := G[S]. 685
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Extreme number of

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

and E(Z) = p4 cr(G) (each crossing being defined by some SuperHyperVertices). Hence
p4 cr(G) ≥ p2 m − 3pn.
Dividing both sides by p4 , we have: 686
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
687
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 688
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 689
points in the plane, and let l be the Extreme number of SuperHyperLines√ in the plane 690
passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 691
Proof. Form a Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P 692
whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive points on the 693
SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This Extreme 694
SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Extreme crossing at most l 695
choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , or 696
3
l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and again 697
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 698
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 700
points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 701
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 702
Proof. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 703
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 704
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Extreme number of 705

P n−1
these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then i = 0 ni = n 706
and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Extreme SuperHyperGraph H with

P
707
SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs 708
between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints on the SuperHyperCircles that pass 709
through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 710
n−1
X
e(H) = ini = 2k − n1 − 2n2 ≥ 2k − 2n.
i=3
Some SuperHyperPairs of SuperHyperVertices of H might be joined by some parallel 711
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 712
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with 713
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 714
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 715
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 716
by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 717
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 718
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let X be a nonnegative 719
Extreme Variable and t a positive real number. Then 720
E(X)
P (X ≥ t) ≤ .
t
Proof.
X X
E(X) = {X(a)P (a) : a ∈ V } ≥ {X(a)P (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t}
X X
{tP (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t} = t {P (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t}
tP (X ≥ t).
Dividing the first and last members by t yields the asserted inequality. 721
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 722
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let Xn be a nonnegative 723
integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 724
as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 725
Proof. 726
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p 728
almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 729
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is up. 731
Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of G, 732
where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 733
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 734
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph G. 735
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 736
the indicator Extreme Variable for this Extreme Event. By equation, we have 737
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 738
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 739
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: 740
k+1
n
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 741
k+1 −p)(k+1)choose2 −pk/2k+1

n e ne
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 742
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 743
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 744
n → ∞. Consequently, a Extreme SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability 745
number at most k. 746
Definition 4.12. (Extreme Variance). 747
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. A Extreme k-Variable E has a number is 749
called Extreme Variance if the following expression is called Extreme Variance 750
criteria 751
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let X be a Extreme Variable and 753
let t be a positive real number. Then 754
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let X be a Extreme Variable and let t be 756
a positive real number. Then 757
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ 2
= .
t t2
758
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let Xn be a Extreme Variable in a 760
probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 761
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 763
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 764
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 765
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, set 767
f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for which f (k) is 768
less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 769
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 771
result is straightforward. 772
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let f and k ∗ be 774
as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 775
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 776
or 777
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 778
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 780
Definition 4.17. (Extreme Threshold). 781
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let P be a monotone property of 783
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 784
Extreme Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 785
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 786
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 787
Definition 4.18. (Extreme Balanced). 788
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let F be a fixed Extreme 790
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 791
copy of F as a Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph is called Extreme Balanced. 792
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let F be a nonempty balanced 794
Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l SuperHyperEdges. Then 795
n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F as a Extreme 796
SubSuperHyperGraph. 797
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 799
Figure 1. The Extreme SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Extreme Notions of

Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.3)
Example 4.20. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E) 800
in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 801
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 802
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 803
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 804
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 805
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 806
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 807
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as a Extreme 808
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 809
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 810
C(N SHG)Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
811
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 814
E4 is a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 815
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 816
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 817
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as a Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 818
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme 819

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 820

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + z.
821
straightforward. 824

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
825



= {E1 }.
= z3.
= {V3 }.
= z2.
829


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
833

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


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

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



845

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

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

853

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

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

861

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

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



869

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
873


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
877

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
881




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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
889


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

= {E1 , E2 }.
= z 10 + z 2 .
= {V2 ({R}, {M6 }, {L6 }, {F }, {P }, {J}, {M }), V1 , V3 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + 7z.
897




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
901
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 902
The all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 903
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 904
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 905
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 906
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 907
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph 908
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only 909
the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside of 910
any given Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to 911
some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Extreme 912
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in 913
an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of 914
them but not all of them. 915
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If

a Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then
the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is at 916
least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 917
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In other 918
words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum 919
Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor 920
in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge with the 921
maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, has the Extreme 922
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 923
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Then
the Extreme number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor has, the least Extreme cardinality,
the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality, is the Extreme cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s a Extreme type-result-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the least Extreme cardinality, the 924
lower sharp Extreme bound for cardinality. 925
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph 926
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 927
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Extreme type-result-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower 928
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Extreme type-result-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is the cardinality 929
of 930

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Proof. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {z} isn’t a quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor
since neither amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges nor amount of SuperHyperVertices
where amount refers to the Extreme number of SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges)
more than one to form any kind of SuperHyperEdges or any number of
SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the Extreme SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
This Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices has the eligibilities to

propose property such that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperVertex of a Extreme
SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme

SuperHyperVertices but the maximum Extreme cardinality indicates that these
Extreme type-SuperHyperSets couldn’t give us the Extreme lower bound in the term of
Extreme sharpness. In other words, the Extreme SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }}
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices implies at least on-quasi-triangle style is up but

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

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph
ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the generality of the
connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. Thus if we assume in the worst case,
literally,
V \ V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
Is a quasi-R-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 Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the connected
loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and their
quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-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 931
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 932
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 933
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 934
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the Extreme 935
SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to be applied. 936
Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main definition but by 937
the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 938
The Extreme structure of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor decorates the Extreme

SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Extreme connections so as this Extreme
style implies different versions of Extreme SuperHyperEdges with the maximum
Extreme cardinality in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The
lower Extreme bound is to have the maximum Extreme groups of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have perfect Extreme connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges
and the outside of this Extreme SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the
connectedness of the used Extreme SuperHyperGraph arising from its Extreme
properties taken from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Extreme
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Extreme SuperHyperSet, then there’s no Extreme
connection. Furthermore, the Extreme existence of one Extreme SuperHyperVertex has

no Extreme effect to talk about the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since at least two
Extreme SuperHyperVertices involve to make a title in the Extreme background of the
Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The Extreme SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no
Extreme SuperHyperEdge but at least two Extreme SuperHyperVertices make the
Extreme version of Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Extreme setting of
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is used as Extreme
adjective for the initial Extreme SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no Extreme
appearance of the loop Extreme version of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge and this
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The Extreme adjective “loop” on the
basic Extreme framework engages one Extreme SuperHyperVertex but it never happens
in this Extreme setting. With these Extreme bases, on a Extreme SuperHyperGraph,
there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at least a Extreme
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor has the Extreme cardinality of a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a
Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor has the Extreme cardinality at least a Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Extreme
SuperHyperSet isn’t a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor since either the Extreme
SuperHyperGraph is an obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel thus it never happens since
there’s no Extreme usage of this Extreme framework and even more there’s no Extreme
connection inside or the Extreme SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious and as its
consequences, there’s a Extreme contradiction with the term “Extreme
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” since the maximum Extreme cardinality never happens for this
Extreme style of the Extreme SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no Extreme
connection inside as mentioned in first Extreme case in the forms of drawback for this
selected Extreme SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Extreme case implies having the Extreme style of on-quasi-triangle
Extreme style on the every Extreme elements of this Extreme SuperHyperSet. Precisely,
the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices such that some Extreme amount of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle Extreme style. The Extreme cardinality of the
v SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Extreme SuperHyperSet

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

Contains some Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

distinct-covers-order-amount Extreme SuperHyperEdges for amount of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices taken from the Extreme SuperHyperSet
It means that the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices

Is a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph as used Extreme 939
background in the Extreme terms of worst Extreme case and the common theme of the 940
lower Extreme bound occurred in the specific Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the 941
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are Extreme free-quasi-triangle. 942
Assume a Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme number of the

Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Then every Extreme SuperHyperVertex has at least no
Extreme SuperHyperEdge with others in common. Thus those Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have the eligibles to be contained in a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor.
Those Extreme SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Extreme
style-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Formally, consider
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
Are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) .
Thus
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z.
where the ∼ isn’t an equivalence relation but only the symmetric relation on the
Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The formal definition
is as follows.
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z
if and only if Zi and Zj are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices and there’s only and only
one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) between the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices Zi and Zj . The other definition for the Extreme SuperHyperEdge
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) in the terms of Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor but with
slightly differences in the maximum Extreme cardinality amid those Extreme
type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus the Extreme
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Extreme cardinality ,
z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Let

E
Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to the
Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 943
Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
944
Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor where E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Extreme intended
SuperHyperVertices but in a Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could
be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Extreme
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If a Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is 945
at least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 946
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In 947
other words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the 948
maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme 949
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme 950
SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, 951
has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 952
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Extreme SuperHyperEdges. But the 953
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel addresses 954
some issues about the Extreme optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially delivers some 955
remarks on the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that 956
there’s distinct amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Extreme 957
SuperHyperVertices up to all taken from that Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 958
SuperHyperVertices but this Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 959
SuperHyperVertices is either has the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality or it 960
doesn’t have maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious 961
SuperHyperModel, there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge containing at least all 962
Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor where 963
the Extreme completion of the Extreme incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, a 964
Extreme embedded R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 965
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 966
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 967
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 968
Extreme SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Extreme SuperHyperOptimal. The less 969
than two distinct types of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum 970
Extreme style of the embedded Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The interior types of the 971
Extreme SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the Extreme number of 972
SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices. 973
The common connections, more precise and more formal, the perfect unique connections 974
inside the Extreme SuperHyperSet for any distinct types of Extreme 975
SuperHyperVertices pose the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Thus Extreme exterior 976
SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge and in 977
Extreme SuperHyperRelation with the interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices in that 978
Extreme SuperHyperEdge. In the embedded Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, there’s the 979
usage of exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside 980
more than outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. 981
One Extreme SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Extreme 982
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement has 983
been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Extreme 984
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the exclusion of the 985
exclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge and with 986
other terms, the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the inclusion of all Extreme 987
SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, is a Extreme 988
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious Extreme 989
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge 990
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme 991
SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor minus all 992
Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, 993
there’s only an unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two 994
distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, minus all 995
Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 996
The main definition of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor has two titles. a Extreme 997
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and its corresponded quasi-maximum Extreme 998
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any Extreme 999
number, there’s a Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with that quasi-maximum Extreme 1000
SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If 1001
there’s an embedded Extreme SuperHyperGraph, then the Extreme 1002
quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the collection of all the Extreme 1003
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbors for all Extreme numbers less than its Extreme corresponded 1004
maximum number. The essence of the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ends up but this 1005
essence starts up in the terms of the Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, again and more 1006
in the operations of collecting all the Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbors acted on the 1007
all possible used formations of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Extreme 1008
number. This Extreme number is 1009
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbors. 1010
Let zExtreme Number , SExtreme SuperHyperSet and GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor be a Extreme 1011
number, a Extreme SuperHyperSet and a Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1012
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class = {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |

SExtreme SuperHyperSet = GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ,
|SExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1013
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1014
GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number
{SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1015
technical definition for the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1016
GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor =
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number |
= max zExtreme Number }.
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Extreme 1017
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor poses the upcoming expressions. 1018
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1019
= maxzExtreme Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1020

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1021
GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


1022
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1023
= maxzExtreme Number

1024

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, “Extreme 1025
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the Extreme 1026
SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 1027
incident to a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, another name for “Extreme 1028
Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of “Extreme 1029
Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” since “Extreme Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” happens “Extreme 1030
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” in a Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background 1031
but “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” 1032
in a Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background since 1033
there are some ambiguities about the Extreme SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To 1034
get orderly keywords, the terms, “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Extreme 1035
Quasi-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor”, and “Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” are up. 1036
Thus, let 1037
zExtreme Number , NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1038
GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor be a Extreme number, a Extreme 1039
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and the new terms are up. 1040
GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |Extreme Cardinality
1041
{NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
|NExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number |
1042
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
1043
And with go back to initial structure, 1044
GExtreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


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

1046
= max zExtreme Number

1047

Thus, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1048
Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor if for any 1049
of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, some interior 1050
Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors with no 1051
Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of 1052
them. 1053
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1054
are coming up. 1055
The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices is the simple

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

Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1056
ESHG : (V, E) is a Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1057
the maximum Extreme cardinality of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme 1058
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Extreme SuperHyperEdge amid some 1059
Extreme SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1060
Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is related to the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the

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

R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1061
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1062
that there’s no a Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1063
instead of all given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme 1064
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and it’s an Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since it’s 1065
the maximum Extreme cardinality of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme

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

Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, not:
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1066
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1067
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1068
Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1069
“Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor” 1070
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1071
Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, 1072
is only and only
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only a Extreme free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and a Extreme on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also it’s
a Extreme stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor amid those obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, are
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1073
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The 1074
all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 1075
quasi-R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 1076
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 1077
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 1078
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1079
Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a Extreme 1080
SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Extreme SuperHyperVertices r. 1081
Consider all Extreme numbers of those Extreme SuperHyperVertices from that Extreme 1082
SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more than r distinct Extreme 1083
SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1084
SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor with the least 1085
cardinality, the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality. Assume a 1086
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1087
the Extreme SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of the 1088
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1089
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1090
Since it doesn’t have 1091
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have some 1093
SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1094
SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Extreme cardinality of a Extreme 1095
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices but it isn’t a Extreme 1096
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since it doesn’t do the Extreme procedure such that such that 1097
there’s a Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely 1098
[there are at least one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes 1099
in the connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Extreme 1100
SuperHyperVertex, titled its Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Extreme 1101
SuperHyperVertex in the Extreme SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Extreme 1102
procedure”.]. There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside the intended 1103
Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Extreme 1104
SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the obvious Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, VESHE is up. 1105
The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, 1106
VESHE , is a Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Extreme 1107
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Extreme pairs are titled 1108
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1109
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1110
VESHE , is the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality of a Extreme 1111
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Extreme 1112
SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely. Thus, in a 1113
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any Extreme 1114
R-Eulerian-Path-Neighbor only contains all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices and all 1115
exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices from the unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge where 1116
there’s any of them has all possible Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all 1117
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with no exception minus all Extreme 1118
SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of them but everything is possible about 1119
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods and Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1120
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, is up. There’s neither empty 1121
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1122
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple Extreme 1123
type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1124
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1125

|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighbor = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−P ath−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. The 1126
Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1127

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

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 Extreme 1139
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the 1140
Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the 1141
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1142

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1143
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1144
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1145

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1146
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1147
that there’s no a Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices given 1148
by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor and it’s an 1149
Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor. Since it’s 1150
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1152
of a Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for 1153
all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There aren’t only less than three Extreme 1154
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet, 1155

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor , 1156

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1157
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor, not: 1158

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not: 1159

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 Extreme 1160
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1161
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1162
“Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor ” 1163
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1164
Extreme Eulerian-Path-Neighbor , 1165
is only and only 1166

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1167
5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 1168
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1169
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 1170
SuperHyperClasses. 1171
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 1172

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1173
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1174
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1175
There’s a new way to redefine as 1176
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 .
Figure 23. a Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Example (16.5)
The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )| ≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 1177
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. The 1178
latter is straightforward. 1179
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 1180
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 1181
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1182
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1183
Then 1184

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1185
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. a Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.7)
1186
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1187

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 1192
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 1193
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1194
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1195

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1196
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1197
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 1198
a new way to redefine as 1199

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 1203
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 1204
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 1205
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 1206
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1207
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1208
Then 1209

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

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1210
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
1211
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1212

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1216
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1217
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1218
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Example (16.11)
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1219
the 1220
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor taken from a connected Extreme 1221
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1222
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 1223
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1224
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 1225
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1226
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 1227
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1228
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 1229
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1230
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1231
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1232

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1233
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
1234
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1236

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1239
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1240
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1241
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1242
the 1243
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1244
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1245
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Figure 27. a Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Example (16.13)
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1248
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1249
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 1250
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 1251
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 1252
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1253
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1254
Then, 1255

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {CEN T ER}.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG | .
Proof. Let 1256
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1257
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
Figure 28. a Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.15)
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1259

latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Thus 1262
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1263
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor could be applied. The unique embedded 1264
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor proposes some longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1265
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1266
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1267
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 1268
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1269
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 1270
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1271
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1272
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1273
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, and the 1274
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. 1275
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is “redefined” 1276
on the positions of the alphabets. 1277
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1278
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian − P ath − N eighbor =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − P ath − N eighborof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − P ath − N eighbor
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−P ath−N eighbor. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 1279
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1280
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1281
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 1282
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and 1283
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor coincide. 1284
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a Extreme 1286
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1287
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1289
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1290
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1291
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is its 1292
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and reversely. 1293
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, 1294
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1295
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1296
its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and reversely. 1297
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1298
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1299
isn’t well-defined. 1300
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1301
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1302
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1303
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1305
Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1306
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1307
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1308
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is 1309
well-defined. 1310
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1311
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1312
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined. 1313
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1315
Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1316
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor is well-defined. 1317
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1318
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1319
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1320
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1321
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1322
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1323
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1324
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1325
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1326
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1327
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1328
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1329
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1330
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1331
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1332
independent SuperHyperSet is 1333
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1334
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1335
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1336
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1337
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1338
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1339
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1340
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1341
maximal 1342
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1343
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1344
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1345
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1346
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1347
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1348
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1349
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1350
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1351
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1352
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1353
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1354
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1355
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1356
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1357
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1358
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1360
number of 1361
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1362
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1363
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1364
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1365
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1366
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1367
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1368
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1369
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1371
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1372
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1373
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1374
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1375
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1376
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1377
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1378
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1381
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1382
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1383
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1384
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1388
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1389
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1390
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1393
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1394
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1395
is a 1396
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1400
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1401
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1402
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1405
number of 1406
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1410
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1411
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1412
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1413
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1414
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1415
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1417
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1418
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1422
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1423
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1424
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1425
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1426
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1427
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1428
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1429
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1433
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1435
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1436
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1437
setting of dual 1438
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1442
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1443
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1444
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1446
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1448
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1449
dual 1450
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1454
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1455
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1456
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1458
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1459
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1460
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. 1466
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1467
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1468
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1469
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1470
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1471
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1472
that 1473
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1474
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1475
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1476
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then 1477
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor set; 1478
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1479
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1480
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1481
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1482
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1483
connected. Then 1484
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1485
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1486
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1487
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1488
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1490
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1491
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1492
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1493
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1494
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1495
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1497
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1498
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1499
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1500
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1501
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1502
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1503
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1505
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1506
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1507
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1508
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then 1510
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1511
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1513
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1514
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1515
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1517
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1518
(ii) Γ = 1; 1519
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1520
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1521
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1522
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1523
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1524
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1525
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1526
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1527
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1528
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1529
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1530
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1532
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1533
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1534
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1536
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1537
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1539

bnc ; 1540
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1541
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1543
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1544
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1545
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF; 1546
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1547
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1548
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1549
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1550
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1551
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1552
SuperHyperSet. Then 1553
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1554
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF; 1555
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1556

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1557
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1558
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1559
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1560
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1561
SuperHyperSet. Then 1562
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1563
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E); 1564
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1565

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1566
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 1567
for N SHF : (V, E). 1568
following statements hold; 1570
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1571
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is an 1572
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1573
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1574
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1575
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1576
following statements hold; 1578
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1579
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is an 1580
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1581
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1582
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1583
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1584
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1585
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1586
hold; 1587
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1588
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1589
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1590
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1592
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1594
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1595
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1596
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1597
hold; 1598
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1599
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1601
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1603
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1605
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1606
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1608
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1609
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1610
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1612
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1614
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1617
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1619
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1620
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1621
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1623
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1625
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor; 1626
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1628
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1630
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1631
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1632
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1634
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1636
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1639
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1641
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1642
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1643
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1645
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1647
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1650
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1651
Recognition 1652
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1653
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease 1654
is considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1655
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1656
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some 1657
Extreme treatments for this Extreme disease. 1658
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1659
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1660
long-term Extreme function. 1661
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme 1662
model [it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the 1663
move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the 1664
cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy 1665
and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this 1666
event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] 1667
to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1668
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1669
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1670
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1671
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a Extreme 1672
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 1673
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1674
find either the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor or the Extreme 1675
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor in those Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1676
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1677
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1678
SuperHyperModel 1679
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1680
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1681
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1682
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1683
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1684
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1685
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1686
the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1687
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1688
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1689
SuperHyperModel 1690
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1691
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1692
Figure 29. a Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

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

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

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1693
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1694
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1695
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1697
is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. 1698
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1699
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1700
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1701
The SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor are 1702
defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1703
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1704
recognitions? 1705
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1706
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor? 1707
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1708
compute them? 1709
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1710
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor? 1711
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Extreme 1712
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1713
they’re based on SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, are there else? 1714
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1715
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1716
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1717
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1718
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1719
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1720
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1721
highlighted. 1722
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1723
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1724
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition 1725
of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based 1726
on the new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1727
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, finds the convenient background to implement 1728
some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme 1729
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1730
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1731
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1732
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are 1733
introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on the 1734
SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor. The 1735
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In 1736
this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1737
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 1738
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1739
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1740
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1741
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1742
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1743
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1744
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1745
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor
3. Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Path-Neighbor 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1746
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1747
12 Extreme SuperHyperDuality But As The 1748
Forms 1750
Definition 12.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperDuality). 1751
Assume a Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 1752
Extreme SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either 1753
V 0 or E 0 is called 1754
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1755
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1756
0 0
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E such 1757
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1758
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1759
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1760
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1761
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1762
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1763
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1764
(v) Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1765
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1766
rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1767
Definition 12.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperDuality). 1768
Extreme SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 1770
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1771
e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1772
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an 1773
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 1774
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1775
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1776
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1778
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1779
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1780
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1781
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1782
SuperHyperEdges of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 1783
conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1784
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1785
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1786
Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1787
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1789
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1791
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1792
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1793
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1794
Extreme coefficient; 1795
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1796
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a 1798
a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1802
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1806
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1811
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1813
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1814
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 1818
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1820
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1821
of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1822
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1826
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1827
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1831
of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1837
Extreme coefficient. 1840
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 1844
E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 1845
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 1846
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, 1847
E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 1848
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1850
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Extreme 1853
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 1854
only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 1855
V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as a 1856
Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every 1857
given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1858


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.

(1 × 1 × 2)z.

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

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



C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1901
Then 1902
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1903
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1907
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1911
Then 1913
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Proof. Let 1914
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1922
Proposition 12.8. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1923
Then 1924
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1925
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1935
Proposition 12.10. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1936
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1937
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1938
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 1943
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1944
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1945
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1946
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1947
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1948
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1956

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1959
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme 1960

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1966
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1977
Then, 1979
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
Extreme Cardinality
|z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1980
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Extreme Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1981
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1982

∃!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 1987
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1988
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained 1990
Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1991
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1993
13 Extreme SuperHyperJoin But As The 1994
Forms 1996
Definition 13.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperJoin). 1997
0 0
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E , ∃Ej ∈ E , such that 2001
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2002
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2003
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2004
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2006
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2007
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2008
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2009
(v) Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2011
re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2012
Definition 13.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperJoin). 2013
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2016
Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme 2017
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2018
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2022
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2023
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2025
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2029
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2030
Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2031
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2032
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2038
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2040
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme 2042
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of a Extreme 2045
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2048
coefficient; 2049
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2050
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2052
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2056
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2057
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2059
SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2061
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2063
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2064
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2066
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2072
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2074
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme 2076
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme 2079
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2082
coefficient. 2083
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. E1 2087
and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 2088
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2093
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2095
given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2101


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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


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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2145
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin =

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

.
Proof. Let 2146
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2150
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2154
Then 2156

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

.
Proof. Let 2157
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2165
Then 2167
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2168

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2178
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2181
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 2186
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2187
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2188
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2190
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2199

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2202
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2203
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2204

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2207
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2208
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2209
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2220
Then, 2222

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

.
Proof. Let 2223
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2224

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2228
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2229
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2230
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2231
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2236
14 Extreme SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2237
Forms 2239
Definition 14.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperPerfect). 2240
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2244
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2245
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2246
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2247
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2249
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2250
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2251
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2252
(v) Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2254
Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme 2255
rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2256
Definition 14.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperPerfect). 2257
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2260
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2262
SuperHyperPerfect; 2267
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2268
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2270
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2274
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2275
Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2276
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an 2277
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2283
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2285
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a 2287
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2295
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2296
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2300
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2302
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2303
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2304
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2307
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2309
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2310
of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2311
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2320
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2333
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2339
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2347


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2391
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2392
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2396
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2400
Then 2402
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2403
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2411
Then 2413
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2414

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2424
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2427
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 2432
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2433
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2434
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2435
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2436
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2445

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2448
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme 2449

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2453
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2454
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2455
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2466
Then, 2468
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2469
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2470

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2474
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2475
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2476
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2477
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2482
15 Extreme SuperHyperTotal But As The 2483
Forms 2485
Definition 15.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperTotal). 2486
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2490
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2491
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2492
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2493
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2495
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2496
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2497
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2498
(v) Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2500
Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme 2501
rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2502
Definition 15.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperTotal). 2503
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2506
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2508
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2512
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2513
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2515
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2519
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2520
Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme 2521
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2522
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2528
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2530
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2532
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2540
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2542
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2546
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2547
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2549
SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2551
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2553
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2554
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2556
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2564
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2566
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2577
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2583
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2591


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

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

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


C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2635
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2636
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2640
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2644
Then 2646
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2647
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2655
Then 2657
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2658
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2668
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2671
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2676
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2677
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2680
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2689

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2692
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2693
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2694

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2697
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2698
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2710
Then, 2712
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2713
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2714

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2718
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2719
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2720
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2721
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2726
16 Extreme SuperHyperConnected But As The 2727
Forms 2729
Definition 16.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperConnected). 2730
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2734
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2735
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2736
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2737
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2739
such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2740
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2741
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2742
(v) Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2744
e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2745
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2746
Definition 16.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperConnected). 2747
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2750
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) 2752
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2753
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2754
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2755
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2757
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2758
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2761
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2762
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2763
SuperHyperConnected; 2765
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2766
of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2767
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2769
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2774
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2776
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2777
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2779
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2786
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2789
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2790
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2791
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2793
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2794
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2797
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of a Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2798
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2799
SuperHyperConnected; 2801
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2802
either of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, 2803
Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2804
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2805
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2812
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2813
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2815
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 2825
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 2826
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 2827
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 2828
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 2829
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as a Extreme 2830
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 2831
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2832
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 2835
E4 is a Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 2836
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 2837
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 2838
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2840


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+2i=011 }.

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

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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2904
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2905
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 2909
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2913
Then 2915
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2916
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )|
≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 2919
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2924
Then 2926
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2927
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2937
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2940
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2945
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2946
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2949
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2950
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2958
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2961
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2962

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2966
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2967
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2979
Then, 2981
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2982
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2983

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2987
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2988
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 2989
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 2990
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2996
17 Background 2997
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 2998
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 2999
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3000
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3001
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3002
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3003
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3004
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3005
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3006
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3007
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3008
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3009
results based on initial background. 3010
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3011
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3012
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3013
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3014
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3015
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3016
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3017
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3018
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3019
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3020
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3021
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3022
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3023
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3024
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3025
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3026
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3027
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3028
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3029
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3030
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3031
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3032
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3033
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3034
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3035
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3036
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3037
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3038
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3039
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3040
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3041
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3042
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3043
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3044
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3045
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3046
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3047
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by 3048
Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3049
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s 3050
Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry 3051
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3052
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic 3053
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked 3054
Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled 3055
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3056
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3057
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3058
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3059
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by 3060
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3061
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3062
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3063
“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3064
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry 3065
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3066
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3067
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3068
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3069
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3070
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3071
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3072
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3073
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3074
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3075
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On 3076
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of 3077
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by 3078
Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3079
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by 3080
Henry Garrett (2022), “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3081
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in 3082
Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating 3083
and SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3084
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3085
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor Cancer’s 3086
Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [146] by Henry Garrett 3087
(2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The Cancer’s 3088
Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set and 3089
Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [147] by Henry Garrett 3090
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3091
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3092
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [148] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3093
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks In 3094
The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3095
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [149] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3096
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3097
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [152] by 3098
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3099
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3100
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [153] by Henry 3101
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3102
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3103
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [156] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3104
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3105
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [159] by Henry 3106
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3107
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3108
in Ref. [160] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3109
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3110
Ref. [161] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3111
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [162] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3113
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3114
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [163] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic 3115
Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) 3116
SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3117
in Ref. [164] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3118
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” 3119
in Ref. [175] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries 3120
to Study Some Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) 3121
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [176] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3122
and [4–176], there are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about 3123
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research 3124
books at [177–277]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3125
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [278, 279]. 3126
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3127
proposed as book in Ref. [266] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3128
Scholar and has more than 4276 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3129
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3130
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3131
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3132
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3133
proposed as book in Ref. [267] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3134
Scholar and has more than 5274 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3135
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3136
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3137
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3138
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3139
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3140
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3141
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3142
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3143
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–176] 3144
alongside scientific research books at [177–277]. Two popular scientific research books 3145
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4276 and 5274 respectively, on neutrosophic 3146
science is on [278, 279]. 3147
References 3148
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3149
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3150
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3151
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3152
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3153
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3154
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3155
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3156
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3157
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3158
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3159
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3160
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3161
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3162
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3163
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3164
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3165
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3166
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3167
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3168
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3169
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3170
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3171
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3172
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3173
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3174
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3175
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3176
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3177
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3178
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3179
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3180
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3181
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3182
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3183
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3184
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3185
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3186
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3187
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3188
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3189
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3190
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3191
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3192
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3193
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3194
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3195
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3196
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3197
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3198
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3199
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3200
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3201
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3202
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3203
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3204
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3205
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3206
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3207
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3208
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3209
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3210
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3211
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3212
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3213
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3214
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3215
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3217
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3218
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3219
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3220
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3221
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3222
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3224
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3228
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3229
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3230
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3231
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3232
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3233
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3234
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3235
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3236
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3237
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3238
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3239
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3240
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3241
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3242
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3243
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3244
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3245
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3246
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3247
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3248
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3249
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7824560). 3250
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3252
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819531). 3253
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3254
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3255
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819579). 3256
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3258
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3259
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3261
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3262
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3264
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3265
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3266
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3267
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3270
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809328). 3271
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3273
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3274
34. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3275
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3276
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3279
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3280
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3281
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3283
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3284
10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3285
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On 3287
Super Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3288
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3289
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3290
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3293
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3296
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3297
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3299
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3300
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3302
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3305
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3308
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3311
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3312
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3314
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3317
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3320
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3323
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3326
51. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3328
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3329
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3330
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3332
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3335
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3336
54. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3337
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3338
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3339
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3341
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3344
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12400.12808). 3345
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3347
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3348
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3350
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, 3353
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3355
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3356
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3357
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3359
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3362
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3365
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3366
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3368
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3371
66. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3373
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3375
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3377
68. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3379
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3380
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3383
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3385
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3386
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3389
72. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3391
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3393
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3395
74. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3397
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3398
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3401
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3402
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3404
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3407
78. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3409
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3411
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3413
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3414
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3416
81. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3418
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3420
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3422
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3423
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3424
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3425
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3426
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3428
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3429
85. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3430
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3431
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3434
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3436
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3437
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super 3440
Returns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31147.52003). 3441
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3442
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3443
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3446
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3448
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3450
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3452
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3453
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3454
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3455
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3458
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3459
95. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3460
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3461
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3464
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3465
97. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3466
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3467
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3470
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3471
99. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3472
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3473
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3476
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3477
101. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3478
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3479
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3482
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3483
103. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3484
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3485
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3487
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3488
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3491
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3492
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3493
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3494
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3497
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3498
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3499
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3500
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3503
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3505
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3506
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super 3509
Infections”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19360.87048). 3510
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3511
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3512
113. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3514
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3515
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super 3518
Vacancy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19911.37285). 3519
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3521
116. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3523
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3524
117. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3526
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3527
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3529
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3530
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3531
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3532
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3533
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3534
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3535
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3536
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3538
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3539
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3540
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3541
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3542
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3543
123. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3544
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3545
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3546
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3547
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3550
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3551
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3554
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3555
126. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3556
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3558
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3559
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3562
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3563
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3566
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3567
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3568
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3569
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3570
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3571
130. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3572
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3573
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3574
131. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3575
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3576
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3577
132. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3578
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper 3579
Extensions of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3580
133. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3581
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3582
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3583
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3584
134. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3585
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3586
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3587
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3588
135. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3589
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3590
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3591
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, 3592
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3593
136. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3594
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3595
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3596
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3597
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3598
137. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3599
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3600
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3601
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3602
138. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3603
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3604
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3605
139. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3606
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3607
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3609
140. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3610
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3611
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3612
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3613
141. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3614
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3615
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3616
142. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3617
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3618
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3619
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3620
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3621
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3622
143. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3623
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3624
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3625
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3626
144. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3627
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3628
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3629
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3630
145. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3631
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3632
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3633
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3634
146. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3635
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3636
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3637
147. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3638
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3639
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3640
148. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3642
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3643
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3644
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3645
149. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3646
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3647
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3648
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3649
150. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3650
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3651
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3652
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3653
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3655
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3656
152. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3657
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3658
153. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3660
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3661
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3662
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3667
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3671
156. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3672
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3673
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3674
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3675
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3678
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3680
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3681
159. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3682
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3683
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3686
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3687
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3689
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3690
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3693
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3694
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3696
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3697
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3700
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3701
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3703
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3704
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3706
167. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3708
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3711
168. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3713
Cancer’s Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, 3716
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3723
171. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3724
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3725
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3726
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3727
172. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3728
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside 3729
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3730
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3731
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3734
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3735
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3738
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3739
175. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3740
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3741
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3742
176. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3743
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3744
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3745
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3746
177. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3747
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7820680). 3748
178. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3749
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 3750
179. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3751
180. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In 3753
SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 3754
181. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3755
182. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3757
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804449). 3758
183. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3759
184. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3761
185. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3763
186. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3765
187. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3767
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3768
188. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3769
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3770
189. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3771
190. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3773
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3774
191. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3775
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3776
192. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3777
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3778
193. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3779
194. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3781
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3782
195. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3783
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3784
196. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3785
197. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3787
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3788
198. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3789
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3790
199. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3791
200. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3793
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3794
201. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3795
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3796
202. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3797
203. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3799
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3800
204. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3801
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3802
205. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3803
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3804
206. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3805
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3806
207. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3807
208. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3809
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 3810
209. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3811
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 3812
210. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3813
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 3814
211. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3815
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 3816
212. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3817
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 3818
213. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3819
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 3820
214. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3821
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 3822
215. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3823
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 3824
216. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3825
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 3826
217. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3827
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 3828
218. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3829
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 3830
219. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3831
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 3832
220. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3833
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 3834
221. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3835
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 3836
222. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3837
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 3838
223. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3839
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 3840
224. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3841
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 3842
225. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3843
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 3844
226. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3845
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 3846
227. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3847
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 3848
228. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3849
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 3850
229. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3851
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 3852
230. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3853
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 3854
231. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3855
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 3856
232. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3857
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3858
233. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3859
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3860
234. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3861
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 3862
235. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3863
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3864
236. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3865
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3866
237. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3867
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3868
238. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3869
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 3870
239. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3871
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 3872
240. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3873
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 3874
241. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3875
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3876
242. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3877
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3878
243. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3879
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3880
244. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3881
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 3882
245. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3883
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 3884
246. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3885
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3886
247. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3887
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3888
248. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3889
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3890
249. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3891
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3892
250. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3893
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 3894
251. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3895
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 3896
252. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3897
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3898
253. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3899
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3900
254. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3901
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3902
255. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3903
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3904
256. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3905
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3906
257. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3907
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3908
258. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3909
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3910
259. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3911
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3912
260. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3913
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3914
261. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3915
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3916
262. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3917
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3918
263. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3919
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3920
264. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3921
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3922
265. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3923
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3924
266. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3925
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3926
267. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3927
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3928
268. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3929
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3930
269. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3931
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3932
270. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3933
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3934
271. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3935
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3936
272. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3937
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3938
273. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3939
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3940
274. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3941
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3942
275. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3943
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3944
276. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3945
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 3946
277. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3947
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 3948
278. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3949
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 3950
279. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3951
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 3952
View publication stats

New Ideas On Super Nebulous by Hyper Nebbish of Eulerian-Path-Neighbor in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Ideas On Super Nebulous by Hyper Nebbish of Eulerian-Path-Neighbor in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In

Preprint · April 2023

444 PUBLICATIONS 12,068 CITATIONS

On Fuzzy Logic View project

Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 2

Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With 3

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

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

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 61