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

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/370057529
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

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

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
446 PUBLICATIONS 12,360 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Combinatorics View project
On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 16 April 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper 3
Eulogy On Super EULA 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is 10
a Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
a SuperHyperPath and it has
the maximum number of SuperHyperEdges;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 16
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 19
∀Va ∈ P : P is
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 21
∀Va ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23
e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 24
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 26
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 27
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 28
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 32
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 33
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive 34
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; a Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 40
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 41
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 42
conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 43
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 44
an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 45
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 46
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and 47
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 48
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 49
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 50
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 51
Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 52
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and 53
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 54
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 55
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 59
coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 60
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 61
of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 62
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 63
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 64
Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of 65
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 69
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 70
conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 71
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; a 72
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 73
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 77
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 78
cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 79
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 80
an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 81
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 85
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 86
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 87
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and 89
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 90
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 91
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 95
coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 96
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 97
of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 98
Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new 101
SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and Neutrosophic 102
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut 103
for them but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, 104
and SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature 105
review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the 106
significancy of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 107
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions 108
are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with 109
different tools. The applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical 110
aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to 111
figure out the challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special 112
case is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. 113
Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. 114
These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 115
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 116
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 117
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 118
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 119
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 120
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 121
δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 122
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 123
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 124
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 125
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 126
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a 127
maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 128
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 129
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 130
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 131
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 132
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 133
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 134
version of a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut . Since there’s more ways to get type-results 135
to make a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut more understandable. For the sake of having 136
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 137
“SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are 138
assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the 139
usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 140
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 141
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of 142
Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The 143
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & 144
The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 145
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of 146
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 147
“The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get 148
structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of 149
SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut . It’s the main. It’ll be 150
disciplinary to have the foundation of previous definition in the kind of 151
SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut until the 152
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then it’s officially called a “SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” 153
but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut . There are some instances about 154
the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut ”. These 155
two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the 156
disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut . For 157
the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s a need to 158
“redefine” the notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” and a 159
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 160
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 161
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 162
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the 163
intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut are redefined to a 164
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to 165
define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get 166
Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut more 167
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 168
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 169
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 170
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 171
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, “Neutrosophic 172
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 173
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 174
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” where 175
it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the 176
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices 177
from a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut .] SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut . A graph is a 178
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 179
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 180
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 181
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 182
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 183
SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 184
all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 185
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, 186
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one 187
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 188
forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 189
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 190
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 191
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 192
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 193
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 194
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 195
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 196
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 197
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 198
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 199
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 200
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 201
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 202
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 203
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 204
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 205
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 206
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 207
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 208
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 209
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 210
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic 211
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 212
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 213
either the longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut or the strongest 214
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the 215
longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, called SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and the 216
strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, called Neutrosophic 217
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 218
SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s 219
not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style 220
of a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. There isn’t any formation of any 221
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 222
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 223
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut theory, SuperHyperGraphs, 224
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 225
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 226
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 227
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 228
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 229
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 230
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 231
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 232
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 233
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 234
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 235
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 236
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 237
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 238
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 239
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 240
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 241
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 242
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 243
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 244
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 245
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 246
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 247
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 248
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 249
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 250
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 251
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 252
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 253
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 254
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 255
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 256
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 257
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 258
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 259
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 260
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 261
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 262
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 263
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 264
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 265
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 266
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 267
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 268
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 269
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 270
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 271
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 272
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 273
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 274
either the optimal SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut or the Neutrosophic 275
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general 276
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic 277
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 278
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 279
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. There isn’t any formation of any 280
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 281
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 282
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 283
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” of either individual of cells or the 284
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 285
of SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 286
group of cells? 287
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 288
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 289
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 290
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 291
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” on 292
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 293
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 294
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 295
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 296
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 297
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 298
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 299
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 300
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 301
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 302
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 303
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 304
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 305
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, are figured out in sections “ 306
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”. In the 307
sense of tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut to make sense about 308
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 309
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 310
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 311
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. As going 312
back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 313
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 314
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 315
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 316
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 317
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 318
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 319
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, 320
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 321
“Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 322
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 323
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 324
presented in section, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”. The keyword of this research 325
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 326
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 327
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 328
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 329
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 330
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 331
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 332
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 333
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 334
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 335
Research On the Redeemed Ways 336
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 337
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [177],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 338
Set](Ref. [177],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 339
(NSHG)](Ref. [177],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 340
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [177],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [177], 341
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 342
(NSHG)](Ref. [177],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 343
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [177],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 344
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [177],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 345
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [177]. 346
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 347
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 348
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [177],Definition 2.1,p.1). 349
Let X be a Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted

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

+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a
truth-membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets of 350
+
]− 0, 1 [. 351
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [177],Definition 2.2,p.2). 352
Let X be a Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted

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

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

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

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [177],Definition 353
2.5,p.2). 354
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 355
pair S = (V, E), where 356
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 357
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 358
1, 2, . . . , n); 359
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 360
V; 361
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 362
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 363
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 364
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 365
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 366
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 367
(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 . 368
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 369
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 370
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 371
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 372
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 373
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 374
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 375
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 376
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 377
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 378
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 379
(Ref. [177],Definition 2.7,p.3). 380
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 381
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 382
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 383
characterized as follow-up items. 384
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 385
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 386
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 387
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 388
HyperEdge; 389
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 390
SuperEdge; 391
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 392
SuperHyperEdge. 393
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 394
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 395
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [177], Definition 2.7, p.3). 396
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 397
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 398
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 399
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 400
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 401
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 402
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)). 403
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 404
pair S = (V, E), where 405
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 406
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 407
1, 2, . . . , n); 408
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 409
V; 410
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 411
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 412
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 413
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 414
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 415
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 416
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 417
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 418
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 419
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 420
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 421
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 422
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 423
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 424
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 425
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 426
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 427
(Ref. [177],Definition 2.7,p.3). 428
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 429
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 430
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 431
characterized as follow-up items. 432
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 433
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 434
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 435
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 436
HyperEdge; 437
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 438
SuperEdge; 439
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 440
SuperHyperEdge. 441
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 442
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 443
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 444
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 445
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 446
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 447
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 448
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 449
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 450
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 451
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 452
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 453
given SuperHyperEdges; 454
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 455
SuperHyperEdges; 456
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 457
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 458
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 459
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 460
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 461
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 462
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 463
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 464
common SuperVertex. 465
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 466
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 467
of following conditions hold: 468
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 476
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 477
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 478
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 479
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). a

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 480
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 481
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 482
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 483
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 484
SuperHyperPath . 485
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 486
(Ref. [177],Definition 5.3,p.7). 487
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 488
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 489
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 490
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 491
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 492
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 493
(NSHE)). (Ref. [177],Definition 5.4,p.7). 494
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 495
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 496
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 497
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 498
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 499
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 500
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 501
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 503
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 504
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 506
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 507
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 508
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 509
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 510
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 511
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 513
either V 0 or E 0 is called 514
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 515
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 516
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 517
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 518
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 519
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 520
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 521
∀Va ∈ P : P is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 522
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 523
∀Va ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 524
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 525
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 528
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 529
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 532
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 536
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 537
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 538
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 539
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 540
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 541
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 544
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 545
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 546
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 547
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 550
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 551
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 552
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 553
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 554
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 555
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 556
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 557
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 558
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 559
its Extreme coefficient; 560
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 561
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 562
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a 564
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 565
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 566
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 567
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 568
Neutrosophic coefficient; 572
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 573
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 577
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 578
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 579
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 580
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of 582
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 586
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 587
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 588
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 589
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 590
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 591
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 594
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 597
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 600
its Extreme coefficient; 601
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 602
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 609
Neutrosophic coefficient. 613
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 614
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 615
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 616
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut such that either of the following expressions hold for 617
the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 618
|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 619
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 620
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of 621
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut such that either of the following 622
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 623
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 624
|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. 625
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 626
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 627
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s a need to 628
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 629
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 630
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 631
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 632
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 633
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 634
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 635
understandable. 636

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 637
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 638
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 639
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 640
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 641
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 642
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 643
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 644
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 645
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 646
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut more Neutrosophicly understandable. 647
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s a need 648
to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”. 649
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 650
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 651
assign to the values. 652
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. It’s redefined a 653
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the Table (3) holds. 654
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut 655
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 656
Forms 657
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 658
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is 660
called Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is 661
called Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic 662
probability of A. 663
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 664
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 666
Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 667
s-independent criteria 668
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 669
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 670
criteria 671
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)

Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 672
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Any k-function Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut like E is 674
called Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut like 675
E is called Neutrosophic Variable. 676
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 677
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 678
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 680
number is called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 681
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 682
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 683
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A Neutrosophic number is called 685
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 686
Crossing criteria 687
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.

Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 688
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let m and n propose 689
special Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then with m ≥ 4n, 690
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 691
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 692
Neutrosophic independently with probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut p := 4n/m, and set 693
H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 694
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Neutrosophic number of

SuperHyperVertices, Y the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperEdges, and Z the
Neutrosophic number of crossings of H. The trivial bound noted above, when applied to
H, yields the inequality Z ≥ cr(H) ≥ Y − 3X. By linearity of Neutrosophic Expectation,
E(Z) ≥ E(Y ) − 3E(X).
Now E(X) = pn, E(Y ) = p2 m (each SuperHyperEdge having some SuperHyperEnds)
and E(Z) = p4 cr(G) (each crossing being defined by some SuperHyperVertices). Hence
p4 cr(G) ≥ p2 m − 3pn.
Dividing both sides by p4 , we have: 695
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
696
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 697
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let P be a 698
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of 699
SuperHyperLines
√ in the plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 700
1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 701
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 702
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive 703
points on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 704
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 705
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 706
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 707
2 3
again l < 32n /k . 708
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let P be a 710
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P 711
at unit SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 712
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 713
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 714
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 715
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 716
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
717
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 718
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints 719
on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 720
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 721
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 722
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 723
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 724
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 725
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 726
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 727
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 728
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let X be a nonnegative 729
Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 730
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. 731
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 732
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let Xn be a 733
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 734
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 735
Proof. 736
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A special 738
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 739
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A special SuperHyperGraph in 741
Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 742
SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 743
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 744
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 745
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 746
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 747
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 748
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 749
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 750
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: 751
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 752
nk+1 e−p)(k+1)choose2 ne−pk/2k+1

E(X) ≤ =
(k + 1)! (k + 1)!
Suppose now that k = d2p−1 log ne. Then k ≥ 2p−1 log n, so ne−pk/2 ≤ 1. Because k 753
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 754
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 755
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 756
stability number at most k. 757
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 758
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 760
number is called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called 761
Neutrosophic Variance criteria 762
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let X be a 764
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 765
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let X be a Neutrosophic 767
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 768
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ 2
= .
t t2
769
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let Xn be a 771
Neutrosophic Variable in a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 772
and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 773
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| 775
in Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that 776
E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| 777
when Xn = 0. 778
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 780
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 781
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 782
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 783
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. As in the proof of related 785
Theorem, the result is straightforward. 786
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let 788
f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 789
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 790
or 791
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 792
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 794
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 795
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let P be a monotone property of 797
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 798
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 799
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 800
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 801
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 802
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 804
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 805
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 806
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let F be a nonempty 808
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 809
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 810
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 811
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 813
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 814
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 815
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 816
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is 817
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 818
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 819
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 820
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 821
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 822
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 823
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 824
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 825
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
826
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 829
SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms 830
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic 831
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is 832
Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it 833
as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is 834
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 835

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + z.
836
Neutrosophicly straightforward. 839

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
840




= {E4 (E5 ), E1 , E2 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
= z 4 + z 3 + 2z 2 + 4z.
844

= {E1 , E4 }.
= 2z 5 .
= {Vi ∈ VE1 , Vi ∈ VE4 }.
= z 7 + 2z 4 + 5z 3 + z 2 .
848


= {Eii=110 , Eii=2232 }.
= 10z 2 .
= {Vii=122 }.
Vi
=z i=122 .
852

= {Eii=110 , E17 , E14 , E13 }
= z 5 + 12z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
= 3z 6 + 5z 5 + 2z 4 + z 3 .
856




= {E3 , E4 , E2 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
= {Vii=414 , }.
= 3z 6 + 5z 5 + 2z 4 + z 3 .
860

= {Eii=110 , E22 , E23 }.
= z 11 + 11z 2 .
= {Vii=122 }.
Vi
=z i=122 .
864


= {E2 , E7 , E3 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
= {Vii=414 }.
= 3z 6 + 5z 5 + 2z 4 + z 3 .
868

= {E1 , E6 , E5 , E4 }.
= z 3 + 3z 2 .
= {Vii=16 }.
= 3z 5 + z 4 + 2z 3 .
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

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

(16.3)

(16.3)
872

= {E1 , E6 }.
= z5 + z2.
= {Vii=13 , Vii=79 }
= z 8 + z 7 + z 6 + 3z 5 .
876

(16.3)

= {E10 , E1 , E6 , E5 , E4 }.
= 5z 2 .
= {Vii=16 }.
= 3z 5 + z 4 + 2z 3 .
880

= {E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 2 .
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
884

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {E1 , E2 , E3 , E4 , E5 }.
= 5z 2 .
= {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V5 , V6 }.
= 3z 5 + z 4 + 2z 3 .
888

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG | .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG | .
892

(16.3)

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
896

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
900

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG \ {Ej }}.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG \{Ej }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG \ {VEj }}.
X |V ∈V
= z i N SHG \{VEj }| .
904

(16.3)

= {Ei , Ej }.
= z |Ei | + z |Ej | .
= {VEi , VEj }.
X
= z VEi + z VEj .
908

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

(16.3)

(16.3)
912

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG \ {E1 }}.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG \{E1 }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG \ {VE1 }}.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG \{VE1 }| .
916
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 917
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 918
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 919
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 920
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 921
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 922
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 923
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 924
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 925
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut minus all Neutrosophic 926
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 927
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 928
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, minus all 929
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 930
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 931
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 932
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of 933
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 934
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 935
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut in some 936
cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 937
Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic 938
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 939
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut has, the least
Neutrosophic cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic
cardinality, is the Neutrosophic cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s a Neutrosophic type-result-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the least Neutrosophic 940
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 941
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 942
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 943
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the 944
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is the 945
cardinality of 946

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Proof. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {z} isn’t a
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut since neither amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges nor
amount of SuperHyperVertices where amount refers to the Neutrosophic number of

SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges) more than one to form any kind of
SuperHyperEdges or any number of SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices has the

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

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

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

bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is the cardinality of
Then we’ve lost some connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of the

connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and
their quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut.
It’s the contradiction to that fact on the generality. There are some counterexamples to
deny this statement. One of them comes from the setting of the graph titled path and
cycle as the counterexamples-classes or reversely direction star as the examples-classes,
are well-known classes in that setting and they could be considered as the
examples-classes and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
Let V \ V \ {z} in mind. There’s no necessity on the SuperHyperEdge since we need at 947
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 948
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 949
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 950
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 951
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 952
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 953
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 954
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut decorates the

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

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

distinct-covers-order-amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges for amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices taken from the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
It means that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
Is a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 955
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 956
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 957
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 958
free-quasi-triangle. 959
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic

number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Then every Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex has at least no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with others in
common. Thus those Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have the eligibles to be
contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Those Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut.
Formally, consider
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
Are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z.
where the ∼ isn’t an equivalence relation but only the symmetric relation on the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The formal
definition is as follows.
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z
if and only if Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and there’s only and
only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) between the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices Zi and Zj . The other definition for the Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) in the terms of Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut but
with slightly differences in the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality amid those
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Thus the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Neutrosophic cardinality ,

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

E
Let Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong
to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 960
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
961
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic
intended SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut,
Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 962
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 963
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 964
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 965
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 966
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut in 967
some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 968
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 969
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 970
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 971
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 972
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 973
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 974
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 975
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 976
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 977
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 978
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 979
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 980
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 981
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut where the 982
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, 983
a Neutrosophic embedded R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 984
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 985
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 986
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 987
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 988
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 989
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The 990
interior types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the 991
Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior 992
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 993
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any 994
distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic 995
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only 996
in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with 997
the interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 998
In the embedded Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s the usage of exterior 999
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than 1000
outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One 1001
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic 1002
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement 1003
has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic 1004
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the exclusion of the 1005
exclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1006
and with other terms, the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the inclusion of all 1007
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a 1008
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 1009
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic 1010
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct 1011
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Neutrosophic 1012
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them 1013
but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Neutrosophic 1014
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 1015
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, minus all 1016
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1017
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut has two titles. a 1018
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and its corresponded quasi-maximum 1019
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 1020
any Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with that 1021
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 1022
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1023
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1024
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cuts for all Neutrosophic 1025
numbers less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 1026
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the 1027
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, again and more in the operations of collecting 1028
all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cuts acted on the all possible used 1029
formations of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. 1030
This Neutrosophic number is 1031
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cuts. 1032
Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut be 1033
a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic 1034
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1035
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1036
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1037
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1038
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1039
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut =
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number |
= max zNeutrosophic Number }.
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Neutrosophic 1040
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut poses the upcoming expressions. 1041
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1042
= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

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

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1044
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1045
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1046

1047

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1048
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1049
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1050
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1051
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” but, precisely, it’s the 1052
generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” since “Neutrosophic 1053
Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” happens “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in a Neutrosophic 1054
SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but “Neutrosophic 1055
SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in a 1056
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background 1057
since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise 1058
from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 1059
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, and “Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” are up. 1060
Thus, let 1061
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1062
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1063
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the new terms are 1064
up. 1065
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1066
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1067
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1068
And with go back to initial structure, 1069
GNeutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1070
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1071

1072

Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1073
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1074
if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1075
some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic 1076
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic 1077
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1078
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1079
are coming up. 1080
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

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

Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut.

The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1081
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1082
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1083
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1084
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1085
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is related to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex inside the intended

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperVertices,
doesn’t have less than two SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far an SuperHyperEdge. Thus the
non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1086
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1087
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1088
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1089
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and it’s an Neutrosophic 1090
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since it’s 1091
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S

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

is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1092
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1093
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1094
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1095
“Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” 1096
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1097
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 1098
is only and only
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only a Neutrosophic free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and a Neutrosophic on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also
it’s a Neutrosophic stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut amid those
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1099
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower

sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is the cardinality
of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1100
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1101
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 1102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 1103
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 1104
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1105
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1106
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1107
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1108
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1109
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1110
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1111
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 1112
Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1113
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1114
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1115
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1116
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1117
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since it doesn’t have 1118
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1120
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1121
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1122
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1123
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic 1124
procedure such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some 1125
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic 1126
SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic 1127
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its 1128
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the 1129
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. 1130
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic 1131
SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. 1132
Thus the obvious Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, VESHE is up. The obvious simple 1133
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, VESHE , is a 1134
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic 1135
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled 1136
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1137
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1138
SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1139
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1140
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1141
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1142
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1143
Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1144
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1145
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1146
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1147
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1148
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1149
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1150
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, is up. There’s neither empty 1151
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1152
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1153
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The 1154
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1155

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut . 1156
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1157
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1158

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1159
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1160
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1162
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1163
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1164
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1165
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1166
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic 1167
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic 1168
SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1169

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic 1171
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1172
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic 1173
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1174

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1175
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1176

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1178
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1179
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1180
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1181
called the Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and it’s an Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1182
Since it’s 1183
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1185
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1186
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1187
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1188
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1189

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut , 1190

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1191
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut , not: 1192

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1193

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1194
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1195
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1196
“Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ” 1197
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1198
Neutrosophic Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut , 1199
is only and only 1200

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1201
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1202
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1203
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1204
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1205
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1206
Then 1207

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG |.
1208
(5.2)
Proof. Let 1209
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1210
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1211
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1212
ViEXT ERN AL ∼ VjEXT ERN AL ≡

∃!Ez ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL ∈ Ez ≡
∃!Ez ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , {ViEXT ERN AL , VjEXT ERN AL } ⊆ Ez .
The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )| ≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 1213
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The 1214
latter is straightforward. 1215
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1216
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1217
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1218
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1219
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Example (16.5)
Then 1220

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG \ {Ej }}.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG \{Ej }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG \ {VEj }}.
X |V ∈V
= z i N SHG \{VEj }| .
Proof. Let 1221
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1222
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1223
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1224

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1228
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1229
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1230
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1232
Then 1233

= {Ei , Ej }.
= z |Ei | + z |Ej | .
= {VEi , VEj }.
z |VEi | + z |VEj | .
X
=
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1234
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1235
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1236
There’s a new way to redefine as 1237

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1241
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1242
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1243
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1244
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic 1245
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1247
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1248

= {Ei ∈ PNmin
SHG }.
X min
= z |Ei ∈PN SHG | .
= {VEi ∈PNmin
SHG
}.
X |V min |
= z Ei ∈PN SHG .
Proof. Let 1249
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
1250
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1251
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1252

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1255
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1256
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1257
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1258
the 1259
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1260
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1261
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1262
solution 1263
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1264
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1265
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1266
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1267
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1268
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1269
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1270
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1271
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1272

= {Ei ∈ PNmin
SHG }.
X min
= z |Ei ∈PN SHG | .
= {VEi ∈PNmin
SHG
}.
X |V min |
= z Ei ∈PN SHG .
Proof. Let 1273
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
1274
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1276

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1279
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1280
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1281
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1282
the 1283
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1284
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1285
solution 1287
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1289
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1290
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1291
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1292
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1293
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1294
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1295
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1296
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 1297

= {Ei ∈ (EN SHG \ {Ej }) ∪ {Ek∗ }}.
X ∗
= z |Ei ∈(EN SHG \{Ej })∪{Ek }| .
= {VEi ∈(EN SHG \{Ej })∪{Ek∗ } }.
X |V ∗ |
= z Ei ∈(EN SHG \{Ej })∪{Ek } .
Proof. Let 1298
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1299
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1301

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

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Neutrosophic
Example (16.15)
latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Thus 1304
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1305
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut could be applied. The unique embedded 1306
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut proposes some longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1307
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1308
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1310
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1311
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1312
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1313
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1315
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1316
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and the 1317
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, some general results are introduced. 1318
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1319
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1320
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1321
N eutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian − T ype − P ath − Cut =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − T ype − P ath − Cutof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − T ype − P ath − Cut
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1322
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1323
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1324
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1325
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and 1326
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut coincide. 1327
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1329
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1330
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1332
strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if and only if it’s a longest 1333
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1335
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1336
its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and reversely. 1337
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 1338
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1339
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic 1340
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and reversely. 1341
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1342
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1343
isn’t well-defined. 1344
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1345
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1346
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1347
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1349
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1350
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1351
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1352
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1353
well-defined. 1354
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1355
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1356
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined. 1357
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1359
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1360
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined. 1361
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1362
is 1363
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1364
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1365
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1366
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1367
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1368
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1369
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1370
∅ is 1371
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1372
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1373
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1374
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1375
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1376
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1377
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1378
independent SuperHyperSet is 1379
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1380
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1381
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1382
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1383
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1384
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1385
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1386
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1387
maximal 1388
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1389
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1390
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1391
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1392
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1393
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1394
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1395
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1396
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1397
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1398
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1399
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1400
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1401
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1402
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1403
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1404
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1406
number of 1407
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1408
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1409
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1410
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1411
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1412
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1413
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1414
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1415
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1417
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1418
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1419
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1420
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1421
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1422
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1423
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1424
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1427
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1428
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1429
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1430
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1434
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1435
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1436
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1439
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1440
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1441
is a 1442
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1446
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1447
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1448
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1451
number of 1452
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1456
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1457
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1458
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1459
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1460
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1461
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1463
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1464
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1468
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1469
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1470
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1471
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1472
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1473
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1474
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1475
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1479
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1481
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1483
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1484
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1488
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1489
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1490
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1492
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1494
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1495
of a dual 1496
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1500
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1501
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1502
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1504
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1505
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1506
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1512
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1513
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1514
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1515
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1516
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1517
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1518
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S 1519
such that 1520
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1521
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1522
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1523
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then 1524
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut set; 1525
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1526
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1527
Then 1528
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1529
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1530
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1531
which is connected. Then 1532
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1533
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1534
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1535
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1536
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1538
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1539
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1540
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1541
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1542
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1543
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1545
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1546
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1547
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1548
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1549
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1550
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1551
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1553
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1554
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1555
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1556
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1558
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1559
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1561
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1562
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1563
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1565
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1566
(ii) Γ = 1; 1567
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1568
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1569
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1570
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1571
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1572
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1573
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1574
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1575
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1576
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1577
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1578
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1580
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1581
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1582
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1584
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1585
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1587
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 1588
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1589
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1591
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1592
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1593
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF; 1594
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1595
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1596
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1597
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1598
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1599
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1600
SuperHyperSet. Then 1601
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1602
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF; 1603
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1604

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1605
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1606
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1607
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1608
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1609
SuperHyperSet. Then 1610
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1611
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E); 1612
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1613

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1614
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1615
for N SHF : (V, E). 1616
Then following statements hold; 1618
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1619
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is an 1620
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1621
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1622
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is a dual 1623
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1624
Then following statements hold; 1626
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1627
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is an 1628
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1629
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1630
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is a dual 1631
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1632
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1633
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1634
statements hold; 1635
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1636
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1637
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1638
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1640
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1642
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1643
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1644
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1645
statements hold; 1646
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1647
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1649
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1651
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1653
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1654
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1656
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1657
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1658
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1660
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1662
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1665
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1667
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1668
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1669
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1671
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1673
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1674
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1676
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1678
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1679
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1680
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1682
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1684
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1687
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1689
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1690
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1691
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1693
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1695
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1698
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1699
Neutrosophic Recognition 1700
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure out 1701
what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of this 1702
Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1703
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1704
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1705
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1706
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1707
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1708
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1709
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1710
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1711
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1712
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1713
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1714
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1715
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened 1716
and what’s done. 1717
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, which 1718
are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic models. 1719
The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and 1720
between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic 1721
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 1722
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1723
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut or the Neutrosophic 1724
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1725
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1726
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1727
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1728
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1729
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1730
featured. 1731
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1732
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1733
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1734
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1735
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1736
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

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

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

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1738
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1739
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1740
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1741
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1742
featured. 1743
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1744
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1745
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1746
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1747
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1748
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1750
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1751
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1752
The SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut are 1753
defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1754
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1755
recognitions? 1756
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1757
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut? 1758
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1759
compute them? 1760
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1761
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut? 1762
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic 1763
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1764
they’re based on SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, are there else? 1765
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1766
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1767
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1768
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1769
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1770
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1771
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1772
highlighted. 1773
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1774
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1775
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of 1776
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based 1777
on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new 1778
SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, finds the convenient 1779
background to implement some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some 1780
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the 1781
regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s 1782
mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the 1783
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, the new SuperHyperClasses and 1784
SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on 1785
the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The 1786
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this 1787
research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the 1788
results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 1789
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of 1790
this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups 1791
of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1792
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1793
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1794
called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix 1795
“SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the background for 1796
the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this research are, 1797
figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1798
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1799
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1800
Forms 1801
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1802
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1806
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1807
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1808
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1809
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1810
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1811
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1812
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1813
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1814
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1815
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1816
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1817
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1818
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1819
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1822
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1824
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1825
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1826
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1827
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1829
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1830
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1833
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1834
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1837
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1838
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1839
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1840
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1841
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 1842
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1843
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1844
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1845
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1846
Extreme coefficient; 1847
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1848
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1849
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1851
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1852
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1853
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1857
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1859
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 1864
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1866
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1867
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1874
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1875
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1880
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1881
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1883
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1885
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1891
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1894
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1899
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1900
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1901
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1902
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1903
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1904
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1905
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1906
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 1909
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1910
SuperHyperDuality. 1915

straightforward. 1918

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.

(1 × 1 × 2)z.

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

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



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1978
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1979
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1980
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1984
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1988
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1989
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1990
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Proof. Let 1991
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2002
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2003
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2013
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 2016
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 2021
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2022
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2023
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2024
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2025
solution 2028
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2035

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2038
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2039

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2045
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2050
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2058
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
|z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2061
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Neutrosophic Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2062
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2063

∃!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 2068
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2069
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2076
Forms 2078
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2079
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2083
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2084
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2085
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2086
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2088
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2089
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2090
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2091
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2093
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2094
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2095
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2096
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2099
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2100
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2101
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2102
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2103
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2104
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2106
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2107
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2109
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2114
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2115
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2116
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2117
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2118
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2123
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2125
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2134
coefficient; 2135
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2136
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2139
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2140
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2141
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2143
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2151
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2152
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2160
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2162
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2171
coefficient. 2172
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2176
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2177
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2178
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2179
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2180
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2181
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 2182
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 2183
SuperHyperJoin. 2184
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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


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

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

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

.
Proof. Let 2258
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2262
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2266

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

.
Proof. Let 2269
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2280
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2281

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2291
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2294
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 2299
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2300
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2301
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2303
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2304
solution 2306
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2313

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2316
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2317

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2321
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2322
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2323
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2328
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2336

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

.
Proof. Let 2339
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2340

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2344
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2345
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2346
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2347
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2354
Forms 2356
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2357
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2361
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2362
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2363
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2364
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2366
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2367
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2368
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2369
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2371
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2372
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2373
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2374
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2377
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2379
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2382
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2384
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2385
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2392
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2393
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2394
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2395
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2401
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2403
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2404
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2412
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2414
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2419
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2421
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2422
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2429
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2430
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2438
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2440
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2446
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2449
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2454
SuperHyperPerfect. 2462
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



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

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

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2536
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2540
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2544
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2547
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2558
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2559

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2569
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2572
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 2577
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2578
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2579
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2580
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2581
solution 2584
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2591

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2594
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2595

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2599
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2600
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2601
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2606
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2614
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2617

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2618

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2622
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2623
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2624
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2625
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2632
Forms 2634
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2635
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2639
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2640
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2641
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2642
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2644
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2645
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2646
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2647
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2649
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2650
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2651
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2652
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2655
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2657
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2660
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2662
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2663
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2665
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2670
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2671
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2672
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2679
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2681
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2690
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2692
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2697
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2699
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2700
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2707
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2708
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2716
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2718
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2727
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2732
SuperHyperTotal. 2740
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2814
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2818
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2822
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2825
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1

Then 2836
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2837
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2847
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2850
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2855
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2856
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2859
solution 2862
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2869

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2872
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2873

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2877
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2878
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2884
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2892
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2895
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2896

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2900
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2901
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2902
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2903
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2910
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2911
Forms 2912
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2913
SuperHyperConnected). 2914
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2918
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2919
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2920
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2921
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2922
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2923
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2925
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2926
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2927
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2928
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2929
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2930
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2932
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2933
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2934
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2935
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2938
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2940
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2941
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2942
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2943
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2945
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2946
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2949
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2950
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2953
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2954
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2955
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2956
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2957
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2958
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2959
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2960
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2962
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2963
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2964
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2965
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2966
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2967
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2968
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2969
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2970
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 2971
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2972
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2973
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2974
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2975
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2978
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2979
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2980
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2982
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2983
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2986
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2987
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2990
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2991
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2994
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2997
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 3000
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3002
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3005
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 3006
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 3007
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3008
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3011
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3012
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3016
SuperHyperConnected. 3024
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 3098
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 3102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3106
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 3109
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

Then 3120
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3121
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3131
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3134
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3139
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3140
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3143
solution 3146
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3153
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3156
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3161
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3162
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3168
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3176
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3179
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3181

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3184
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3185
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3186
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3187
17 Background 3195
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3196
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3197
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3198
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3199
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3200
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3201
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3202
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3203
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3204
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3205
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3206
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3207
results based on initial background. 3208
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating and 3209
Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in 3210
Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3211
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3212
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3213
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3214
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3215
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3216
Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research article studies 3217
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3218
the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3219
SuperHyperNumbers. 3220
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3221
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3222
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3223
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3224
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3225
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3226
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3227
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3228
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3229
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3230
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3231
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3232
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3233
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3234
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3235
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3236
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3237
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3238
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3239
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3240
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3241
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3242
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3243
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3244
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3245
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry 3246
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3247
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3248
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3249
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3250
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3251
Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3252
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3253
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3254
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3255
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3256
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3257
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3258
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3259
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett 3260
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3261
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett 3262
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3263
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3264
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3265
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3266
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3267
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3268
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3269
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3270
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3271
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3272
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3273
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3274
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3275
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3276
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3277
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3278
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3279
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3280
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3281
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3282
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3283
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [147] by Henry 3284
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3285
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3286
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [148] by Henry Garrett 3287
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3288
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3289
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [149] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3290
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3291
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3292
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [150] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3293
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3294
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [153] by 3295
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3296
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3297
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [154] by Henry 3298
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3299
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3300
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [157] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3301
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3302
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [160] by Henry 3303
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3304
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3305
in Ref. [161] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3306
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3307
Ref. [162] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3308
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3309
Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [163] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3310
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3311
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [164] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3312
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3313
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [165] by Henry Garrett 3314
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3315
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [176] by Henry 3316
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3317
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3318
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [177] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–177], there 3319
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3320
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books at [178–279]. 3321
Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4190 and 3322
5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [280, 281]. 3323
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3324
proposed as book in Ref. [268] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3325
Scholar and has more than 4276 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3326
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3327
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 3328
theory. 3329
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3330
proposed as book in Ref. [269] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3331
Scholar and has more than 5274 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3332
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3333
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3334
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3335
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3336
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3337
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3338
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3339
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in SuperHyperGraphs 3340
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–177] alongside scientific 3341
research books at [178–279]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms 3342
of high readers, 4276 and 5274 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [280, 281]. 3343
References 3344
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3345
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3346
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3347
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3348
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3349
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3350
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3351
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3352
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3353
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3354
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3355
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3356
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3357
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3358
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3359
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3360
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3361
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by-eulerian- 3362
super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3363
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3364
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3365
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3366
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3367
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3368
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3369
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3370
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3371
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3372
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3373
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3374
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3375
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3376
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3377
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3378
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3379
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3380
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3381
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3382
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3383
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3384
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3385
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3386
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3387
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3388
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3389
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3390
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3391
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3392
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3393
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3394
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3395
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3396
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3397
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3398
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3399
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3400
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3401
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3402
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3403
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3404
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3405
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3406
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3407
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3408
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3409
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3410
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3411
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3412
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3413
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3414
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3415
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3416
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3417
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3418
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3420
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3424
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3425
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3426
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3427
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3428
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3429
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3430
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3431
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3432
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3433
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3434
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3435
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3436
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3437
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3438
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3439
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3440
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3441
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3442
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3443
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3444
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3445
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7824560). 3446
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3447
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3448
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7824623). 3449
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3451
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819531). 3452
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3453
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3454
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3457
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3458
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3460
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3461
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3463
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3464
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3465
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3466
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3469
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809328). 3470
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3472
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3473
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3475
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3478
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3479
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3480
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3482
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3483
10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3484
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3486
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3487
39. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3488
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3489
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3492
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3495
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3496
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3498
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3499
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3501
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3504
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3507
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3510
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3511
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3513
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3516
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3519
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3522
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3525
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3527
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3528
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3529
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3531
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3534
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3535
55. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3536
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3537
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3538
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3540
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3543
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3546
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3547
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3549
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3550
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3552
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3553
61. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3554
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3555
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3556
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3558
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3561
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3564
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3565
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3567
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3570
67. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3572
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3574
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3576
69. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3578
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3579
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3582
71. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3584
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3585
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3588
73. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3590
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3592
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3594
75. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3596
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3597
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3600
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3601
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3603
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3606
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3608
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3610
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3612
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3613
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3615
82. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3617
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3619
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3621
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3622
84. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3623
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3624
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3625
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3627
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3628
86. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3629
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3630
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3633
88. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3635
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3636
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3639
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3641
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3642
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3645
92. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3647
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3649
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3651
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3652
94. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3653
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3654
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3657
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3658
96. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3659
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3660
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3663
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3664
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3665
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3666
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3669
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3670
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3671
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3672
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3675
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3676
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3677
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3678
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3681
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3682
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3683
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3684
105. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3686
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3687
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3690
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3691
107. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3692
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3693
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3696
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3697
109. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3698
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3699
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3702
111. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3704
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3705
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3708
113. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3710
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3711
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3713
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3714
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3717
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3720
117. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3722
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3723
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3725
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3726
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3728
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3729
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3730
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3731
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3732
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3733
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3734
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3735
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3737
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3738
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3739
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3740
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3741
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3742
124. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3743
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3744
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3745
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3746
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3749
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3750
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3753
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3754
127. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3755
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3757
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3758
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3761
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3762
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3765
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3766
130. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3767
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3768
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3769
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3770
131. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3771
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3772
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3773
132. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3774
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3775
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3776
133. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3777
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3778
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3779
134. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3780
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3781
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3782
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3783
135. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3784
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3785
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3786
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3787
136. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3788
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3789
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3790
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3791
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3792
137. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3793
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3794
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3795
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3796
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3797
138. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3798
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3799
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3800
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3801
139. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3802
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3803
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3804
140. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3805
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3806
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3808
141. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3809
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3810
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3811
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3812
142. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3813
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3814
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3815
143. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3816
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3817
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3818
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3819
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3820
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3821
144. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3822
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3823
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3824
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3825
145. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3826
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3827
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3828
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3829
146. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3830
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3831
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3832
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3833
147. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3834
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3835
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3836
148. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3837
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3838
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3839
149. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3841
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3842
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3843
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3844
150. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3845
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3846
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3847
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3848
151. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3849
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3850
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3851
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3852
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3854
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3855
153. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3856
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3857
154. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3859
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3860
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3861
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3866
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3870
157. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3871
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3872
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3873
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3874
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3877
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3879
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3880
160. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3881
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3882
In Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3886
10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3887
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3889
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3890
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3893
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3894
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3896
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3897
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3900
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3901
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3903
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3904
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3906
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3911
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3912
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3916
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3917
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3920
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3923
172. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3924
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3925
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3926
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3927
173. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3928
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3929
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3930
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3931
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3934
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3935
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3938
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3939
176. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3940
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 3941
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3942
177. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3943
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3944
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3945
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3946
178. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3947
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7826705). 3948
179. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3949
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7820680). 3950
180. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3951
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 3952
181. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3953
182. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3955
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 3956
183. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3957
184. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3959
185. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3961
186. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3963
187. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3965
188. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3967
189. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3969
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3970
190. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3971
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3972
191. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3973
192. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3975
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3976
193. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3977
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3978
194. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3979
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3980
195. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3981
196. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3983
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3984
197. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3985
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3986
198. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3987
199. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3989
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3990
200. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3991
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3992
201. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3993
202. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3995
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3996
203. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3997
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3998
204. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3999
205. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4001
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4002
206. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4003
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4004
207. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4005
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4006
208. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4007
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4008
209. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4009
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4010
210. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4011
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4012
211. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4013
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4014
212. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4015
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4016
213. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4017
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4018
214. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4019
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4020
215. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4021
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4022
216. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4023
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4024
217. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4025
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4026
218. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4027
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4028
219. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4029
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4030
220. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4031
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4032
221. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4033
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4034
222. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4035
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4036
223. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4037
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4038
224. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4039
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4040
225. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4041
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4042
226. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4043
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4044
227. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4045
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4046
228. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4047
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4048
229. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4049
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4050
230. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4051
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4052
231. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4053
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4054
232. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4055
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4056
233. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4057
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4058
234. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4059
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4060
235. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4061
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4062
236. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4063
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4064
237. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4065
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4066
238. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4067
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4068
239. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4069
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4070
240. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4071
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4072
241. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4073
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4074
242. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4075
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4076
243. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4077
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4078
244. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4079
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4080
245. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4081
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4082
246. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4083
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4084
247. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4085
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4086
248. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4087
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4088
249. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4089
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4090
250. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4091
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4092
251. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4093
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4094
252. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4095
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4096
253. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4097
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4098
254. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4099
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4100
255. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4101
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4102
256. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4103
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4104
257. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4105
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4106
258. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4107
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4108
259. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4109
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4110
260. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4111
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4112
261. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4113
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4114
262. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4115
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4116
263. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4117
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4118
264. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4119
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4120
265. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4121
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4122
266. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4123
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4124
267. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4125
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4126
268. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4127
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4128
269. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4129
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4130
270. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4131
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4132
271. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4133
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4134
272. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4135
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4136
273. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4137
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4138
274. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4139
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4140
275. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4141
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4142
276. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4143
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4144
277. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4145
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4146
278. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4147
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4148
279. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4149
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4150
280. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4151
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4152
281. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4153
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4154
View publication stats

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

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · April 2023

446 PUBLICATIONS 12,360 CITATIONS

On Combinatorics View project

On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper 3

Eulogy On Super EULA 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

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

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

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

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 14

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 16

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

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

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 19

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 21

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

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

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 24

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic 25

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 26

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

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

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

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 30

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic 31

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

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

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

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35

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

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 38

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic 39

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 40

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

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 42

conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 43

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 44

an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 45

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 46

re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and 47

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 48

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 49

Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 50

cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 51

Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 52

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and 53

the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 54

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 55

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 56

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and Neutrosophic 57

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 58

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