New Ideas On Super EULA by Hyper Eulogy of Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/370057375
New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In

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

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7834261
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
447 PUBLICATIONS 12,464 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Combinatorics View project
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs 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 On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 2
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With 3
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperEulerian-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 “Extreme 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 “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 250
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 Extreme 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
Extreme 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 an 272
Extreme 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 Extreme 275
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in those Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general results 276
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme SuperHyperPath 277
s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least 278
three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. There isn’t 279
any formation of any SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut but literarily, it’s the deformation of 280
any SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 281
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 282
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” of either individual of cells or the 283
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 284
of SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 285
group of cells? 286
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 287
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 288
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 289
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 290
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” and “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” on 291
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken 292
more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this 293
SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 294
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 295
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 296
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 297
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 298
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 299
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are 300
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 301
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 302
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 303
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 304
and Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, are figured out in sections “ 305
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” and “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”. In the 306
sense of tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut to make sense about 307
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Extreme 308
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 309
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 310
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back 311
to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 312
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Extreme 313
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 314
Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 315
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 316
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 317
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 318
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, 319
“Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results 320
on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s done about 321
the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and going to 322
figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as presented 323
in section, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”. The keyword of this research debut in the 324
section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and subsections “Case 1: 325
The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The 326
Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, 327
“Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s 328
happened in this research in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to 329
figure out this research in featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this 330
research alongside about what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense 331
about what’s figured out are included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 332
3 Extreme Preliminaries Of This Scientific 333
Research On the Redeemed Ways 334
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 335
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [178],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 336
Set](Ref. [178],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 337
(NSHG)](Ref. [178],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 338
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [178],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [178], 339
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 340
(NSHG)](Ref. [178],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 341
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [178],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 342
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [178],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 343
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [178]. 344
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 345
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 346
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [178],Definition 2.1,p.1). 347
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 348
+
]− 0, 1 [. 349
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [178],Definition 2.2,p.2). 350
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. [178],Definition 351
2.5,p.2). 352
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 353
pair S = (V, E), where 354
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 355
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 356
1, 2, . . . , n); 357
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 358
V; 359
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 360
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 361
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 362
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 363
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 364
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 365
(ix) and the following conditions hold:
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 . 366
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 367
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 368
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 369
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 370
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 371
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 372
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 373
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 374
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 375
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 376
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 377
(Ref. [178],Definition 2.7,p.3). 378
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 379
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 380
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 381
characterized as follow-up items. 382
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 383
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 384
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 385
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 386
HyperEdge; 387
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 388
SuperEdge; 389
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 390
SuperHyperEdge. 391
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 392
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 393
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [178], Definition 2.7, p.3). 394
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 395
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 396
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 397
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 398
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 399
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 400
Definition 3.8. The degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-membership

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

and FA (X) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 3.9. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued Neutrosophic set
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.10. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 401
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 402
pair S = (V, E), where 403
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 404
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 405
1, 2, . . . , n); 406
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 407
V; 408
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 409
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 410
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 411
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 412
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 413
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 414
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 415
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 416
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 417
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 418
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 419
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 420
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 421
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 422
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 423
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 424
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 425
(Ref. [178],Definition 2.7,p.3). 426
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 427
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 428
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 429
characterized as follow-up items. 430
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 431
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 432
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 433
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 434
HyperEdge; 435
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 436
SuperEdge; 437
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 438
SuperHyperEdge. 439
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 440
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 441
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 442
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 443
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 444
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 445
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 446
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 447
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 448
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 449
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 450
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 451
given SuperHyperEdges; 452
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 453
SuperHyperEdges; 454
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 455
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 456
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 457
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 458
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 459
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 460
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 461
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 462
common SuperVertex. 463
Definition 3.14. Let a pair S = (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)

S. Then a sequence of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 464
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 465
of following conditions hold: 466
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 467
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 468
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 475
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 476
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 477
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). a

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 478
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 479
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 480
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 481
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 482
SuperHyperPath . 483
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 484
(Ref. [178],Definition 5.3,p.7). 485
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). A

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
have 486
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 487
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 488
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 489
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 490
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 491
(NSHE)). (Ref. [178],Definition 5.4,p.7). 492
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 493
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 494
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 495
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 496
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 497
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 498
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 499
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 501
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 502
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 504
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 505
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 506
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 507
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 508
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 509
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 511
either V 0 or E 0 is called 512
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 513
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 514
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 515
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 516
∀Ea ∈ P : P is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 517
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 518
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 519
∀Va ∈ P : P is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the following expression is 520
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut criteria holds 521
∀Va ∈ P : P is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 522
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 523
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 526
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 527
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 529
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 530
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 534
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 535
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 536
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 537
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 538
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 539
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 542
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 543
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 544
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 545
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 548
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 549
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 550
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 551
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 552
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 553
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 554
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 555
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 556
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 557
its Extreme coefficient; 558
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 559
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Neutrosophic 560
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for a 562
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 563
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 564
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 565
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 566
Neutrosophic coefficient; 570
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of Neutrosophic 571
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 576
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 577
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if it’s either of 580
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 584
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 585
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 586
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 587
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 588
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 589
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 592
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 593
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 594
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 595
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 596
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 598
its Extreme coefficient; 599
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial if 600
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 604
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
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 605
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 606
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 607
Neutrosophic coefficient. 611
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut). 612
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 613
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 614
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut such that either of the following expressions hold for 615
the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 616
|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 617
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 618
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is a Neutrosophic kind of 619
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut such that either of the following 620
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 621
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 622
|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. 623
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 624
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 625
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s a need to 626
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 627
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 628
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 629
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 630
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 631
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 632
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 633
understandable. 634

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 635
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 636
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 637
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 638
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 639
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 640
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 641
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 642
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 643
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 644
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut more Neutrosophicly understandable. 645
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s a need 646
to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut”. 647
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 648
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 649
assign to the values. 650
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. It’s redefined a 651
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if the Table (3) holds. 652
4 Extreme SuperHyper But As The

Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut 653
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 654
Forms 655
Definition 4.1. (Extreme event). 656
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 657
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Any Extreme k-subset of A of V is called 658
Extreme k-event and if k = 2, then Extreme subset of A of V is called Extreme 659
event. The following expression is called Extreme probability of A. 660
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Extreme Independent). 661
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. s Extreme k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 663
Extreme s-independent if the following expression is called Extreme 664
s-independent criteria 665
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Extreme k-events of A and B is called Extreme independent. 666
The following expression is called Extreme independent criteria 667
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Extreme Variable). 668
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Any k-function Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut like E is 670
called Extreme k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut like E is 671
called Extreme Variable. 672
The notion of independent on Extreme Variable is likewise. 673
Definition 4.4. (Extreme Expectation). 674
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. an Extreme k-Variable E has a number is 676
called Extreme Expectation if the following expression is called Extreme 677
Expectation criteria 678
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Extreme Crossing). 679
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. an Extreme number is called Extreme 681
Crossing if the following expression is called Extreme Crossing criteria 682
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 683
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let m and n propose special 684
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then with m ≥ 4n, 685
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be an Extreme 686
random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G Extreme 687
independently with probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] and 688
H := G[S]. 689
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Extreme number of

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

and E(Z) = p4 cr(G) (each crossing being defined by some SuperHyperVertices). Hence
p4 cr(G) ≥ p2 m − 3pn.
Dividing both sides by p4 , we have: 690
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ 3
= 3 = m n .
p (4n/m) 64
691
Theorem 4.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 692
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 693
points in the plane, and let l be the Extreme number of SuperHyperLines

√ in the plane 694
passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 695
Proof. Form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet 696
P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between conseNeighborive points on the 697
SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This Extreme 698
SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Extreme crossing at most l 699
choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , or 700
3
l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and again 701
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 702
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 704
points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 705
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 706
Proof. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 707
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 708
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Extreme number of 709

P n−1
these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then i = 0 ni = n 710
and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph H with

P
711
SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs 712
between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints on the SuperHyperCircles that pass 713
through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 714
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 715
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 716
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with 717
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 718
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 719
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 720
by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 721
Proposition 4.9. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 722
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let X be a nonnegative 723
Extreme Variable and t a positive real number. Then 724
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. 725
Corollary 4.10. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 726
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let Xn be a 727
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 728
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 729
Proof. 730
Theorem 4.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 731
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A special 732
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 733
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is up. 735
Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of G, 736
where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 737
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 738
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph G. 739
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 740
the indicator Extreme Variable for this Extreme Event. By equation, we have 741
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 742
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 743
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: 744
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 745
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 746
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 747
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 748
n → ∞. Consequently, an Extreme SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability 749
number at most k. 750
Definition 4.12. (Extreme Variance). 751
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. an Extreme k-Variable E has a number is 753
called Extreme Variance if the following expression is called Extreme Variance 754
criteria 755
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 an Extreme 757
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 758
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let X be an Extreme Variable and let t 760
be a positive real number. Then 761
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
762
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let Xn be an Extreme 764
Variable in a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 765
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 766
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 768
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 769
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 770
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, set 772
f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for which f (k) is 773
less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 774
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 776
result is straightforward. 777
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let 779
f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 780
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 781
or 782
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 783
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 785
Definition 4.17. (Extreme Threshold). 786
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let P be a monotone property of 788
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 789
Extreme Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 790
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 791
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 792
Definition 4.18. (Extreme Balanced). 793
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let F be a fixed Extreme 795
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 796
copy of F as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph is called Extreme Balanced. 797
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Let F be a nonempty 799
balanced Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 800
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 801
as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph. 802
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The latter is straightforward. 804
Example 4.20. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E) 805
in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 806
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 807
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 808
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 809
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 810
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 811
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 812
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 813
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 814
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 815
C(N SHG)Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut SuperHyperPolynomial
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
816
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 819
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 820
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 821
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 822
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 823
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme 824
Figure 1. The Extreme SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Extreme Notions of

Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.3)
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 825

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 + z.
826
straightforward. 829

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= z8 + z4 + z3.
830




= {E4 (E5 ), E1 , E2 }.
= z 5 + 2z 3 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
= z 4 + z 3 + 2z 2 + 4z.
834

= {E1 , E4 }.
= 2z 5 .
= {Vi ∈ VE1 , Vi ∈ VE4 }.
= z 7 + 2z 4 + 5z 3 + z 2 .
838


= {Eii=110 , Eii=2232 }.
= 10z 2 .
= {Vii=122 }.
Vi
=z i=122 .
842

= {Eii=110 , E17 , E14 , E13 }
= z 5 + 12z 2 .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
= 3z 6 + 5z 5 + 2z 4 + z 3 .
846




= {E3 , E4 , E2 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
= {Vii=414 , }.
= 3z 6 + 5z 5 + 2z 4 + z 3 .
850

= {Eii=110 , E22 , E23 }.
= z 11 + 11z 2 .
= {Vii=122 }.
Vi
=z i=122 .
854


= {E2 , E7 , E3 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
= {Vii=414 }.
= 3z 6 + 5z 5 + 2z 4 + z 3 .
858

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



862

= {E1 , E6 }.
= z5 + z2.
= {Vii=13 , Vii=79 }
= z 8 + z 7 + z 6 + 3z 5 .
866

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

870

= {E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 2 .
= {V1 , V2 , V3 }.
= 2z 5 + z 3 .
874

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


878

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG | .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG | .
882

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

886

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
890

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG \ {Ej }}.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG \{Ej }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG \ {VEj }}.
X |V ∈V
= z i N SHG \{VEj }| .
894




= {Ei , Ej }.
= z |Ei | + z |Ej | .
= {VEi , VEj }.
X
= z VEi + z VEj .
898

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



902

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG \ {E1 }}.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG \{E1 }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG \ {VE1 }}.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG \{VE1 }| .
906
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 907
The all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 908
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 909
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 910
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 911
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 912
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph 913
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only 914
the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside of 915
any given Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to 916
some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Extreme 917
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in 918
an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of 919
them but not all of them. 920
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If

an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then
the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at 921
least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 922
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In other 923
words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum 924
Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut 925
in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge with the 926
maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, has the Extreme 927
SuperHyperVertices are contained in an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 928
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Then
the Extreme number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut has, the least Extreme cardinality,
the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality, is the Extreme cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s an Extreme type-result-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the least Extreme cardinality, the 929
lower sharp Extreme bound for cardinality. 930
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph 931
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 932
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut

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

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

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

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

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph
ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the generality of the
connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. Thus if we assume in the worst case,
literally,
V \ V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
Is a quasi-R-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 Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the connected
loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and their
quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Eulerian-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 936
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 937
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 938
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 939
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the Extreme 940
SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to be applied. 941
Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main definition but by 942
the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 943
The Extreme structure of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut decorates the Extreme

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

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

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

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

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

E
Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to the
Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 948
Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
949
Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Extreme intended
SuperHyperVertices but in an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could
be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Extreme
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 950
at least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 951
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In 952
other words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the 953
maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme 954
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme 955
SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, 956
has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are contained in an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 957
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Extreme SuperHyperEdges. But the 958
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel addresses 959
some issues about the Extreme optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially delivers some 960
remarks on the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that 961
there’s distinct amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Extreme 962
SuperHyperVertices up to all taken from that Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 963
SuperHyperVertices but this Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 964
SuperHyperVertices is either has the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality or it 965
doesn’t have maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious 966
SuperHyperModel, there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge containing at least all 967
Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut 968
where the Extreme completion of the Extreme incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 969
literarily, an Extreme embedded R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The SuperHyperNotions of 970
embedded SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, 971
these types of SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum 972
SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the embedded setting is elected such that those 973
SuperHyperSets have the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality and they’re 974
Extreme SuperHyperOptimal. The less than two distinct types of Extreme 975
SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum Extreme style of the embedded 976
Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The interior types of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 977
deciders. Since the Extreme number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the 978
interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 979
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Extreme SuperHyperSet for any 980
distinct types of Extreme SuperHyperVertices pose the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 981
Thus Extreme exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Extreme 982
SuperHyperEdge and in Extreme SuperHyperRelation with the interior Extreme 983
SuperHyperVertices in that Extreme SuperHyperEdge. In the embedded Extreme 984
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, there’s the usage of exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices since 985
they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more 986
relevant than the title “interior”. One Extreme SuperHyperVertex has no connection, 987
inside. Thus, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices with one 988
SuperHyperElement has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case 989
implying the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the 990
exclusion of the exclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme 991
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the 992
inclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, is an 993
Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 994
Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge 995
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme 996
SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut minus all 997
Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, 998
there’s only an unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two 999
distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, minus 1000
all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1001
The main definition of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut has two titles. an Extreme 1002
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and its corresponded quasi-maximum Extreme 1003
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any Extreme 1004
number, there’s an Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with that quasi-maximum 1005
Extreme SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded Extreme 1006
SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Extreme SuperHyperGraph, then the 1007
Extreme quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the collection of all the Extreme 1008
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cuts for all Extreme numbers less than its Extreme corresponded 1009
maximum number. The essence of the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ends up but this 1010
essence starts up in the terms of the Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, again and more 1011
in the operations of collecting all the Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cuts acted on the 1012
all possible used formations of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Extreme 1013
number. This Extreme number is 1014
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cuts. 1015
Let zExtreme Number , SExtreme SuperHyperSet and GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut be an 1016
Extreme number, an Extreme SuperHyperSet and an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1017
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class = {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |

SExtreme SuperHyperSet = GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ,
|SExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1018
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1019
GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zExtreme Number

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number
{SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1020
technical definition for the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1021
GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut =
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number |
= max zExtreme Number }.
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Extreme 1022
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut poses the upcoming expressions. 1023
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1024
= max zExtreme Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1025

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1026
GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


1027
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1028

1029

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, “Extreme 1030
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the Extreme 1031
SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 1032
incident to an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, another name for “Extreme 1033
Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of “Extreme 1034
Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” since “Extreme Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” happens “Extreme 1035
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1036
background but “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Extreme 1037
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1038
preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the Extreme 1039
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Extreme 1040
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Extreme Quasi-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut”, and “Extreme 1041
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” are up. 1042
Thus, let 1043
zExtreme Number , NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1044
GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut be an Extreme number, an Extreme 1045
SuperHyperNeighborhood and an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the new terms are up. 1046
GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zExtreme Number

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |Extreme Cardinality
1047
{NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
|NExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number |
1048
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
1049
And with go back to initial structure, 1050
GExtreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


1051
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1052

1053

Thus, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1054
Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut if for any 1055
of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, some interior 1056
Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors with no 1057
Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of 1058
them. 1059
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1060
are coming up. 1061
The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices is the simple

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

Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1062
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1063
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 1064
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge amid 1065
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1066
Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is related to the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the

Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex inside the intended Extreme
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is up. The obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is an
Extreme SuperHyperSet includes only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex. But the

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

R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1067
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1068
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1069
instead of all given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme 1070
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and it’s an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since it’s 1071
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of

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

Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, not:
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1072
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1073
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1074
Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1075
“Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut” 1076
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1077
Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 1078
is only and only
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only an Extreme free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and an Extreme on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also
it’s an Extreme stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut amid those obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, are
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1079
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The 1080
all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme 1081
quasi-R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme 1082
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme 1083
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme 1084
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1085
Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let an Extreme 1086
SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Extreme SuperHyperVertices r. 1087
Consider all Extreme numbers of those Extreme SuperHyperVertices from that Extreme 1088
SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more than r distinct Extreme 1089
SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1090
SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut with the least 1091
cardinality, the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality. Assume a 1092
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1093
the Extreme SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of the 1094
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1095
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t an Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1096
Since it doesn’t have 1097
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1099
some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1100
SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 1101
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices but it isn’t an Extreme 1102
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since it doesn’t do the Extreme procedure such that such that 1103
there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1104
uniquely [there are at least one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, 1105
sometimes in the connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), an Extreme 1106
SuperHyperVertex, titled its Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Extreme 1107
SuperHyperVertex in the Extreme SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Extreme 1108
procedure”.]. There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside the intended 1109
Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Extreme 1110
SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the obvious Extreme R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, VESHE is 1111
up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1112
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, VESHE , is an Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all 1113
Extreme SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Extreme pairs are titled 1114
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1115
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1116
VESHE , is the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality of an Extreme 1117
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme 1118
SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely. Thus, in a 1119
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any Extreme 1120
R-Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut only contains all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices and all 1121
exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices from the unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge where 1122
there’s any of them has all possible Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all 1123
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with no exception minus all Extreme 1124
SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of them but everything is possible about 1125
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods and Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1126
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, is up. There’s neither empty 1127
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1128
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple Extreme 1129
type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1130
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1131

|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−T ype−P ath−CutSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The 1132
Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1133

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1134
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1135
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1137
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1138
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There are not only two Extreme 1139
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet. Thus the 1140
non-obvious Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is up. The obvious simple Extreme 1141
type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is an Extreme SuperHyperSet 1142
includes only two Extreme SuperHyperVertices. But the Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1143
the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1144

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Doesn’t have less than three SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme 1145
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the 1146
Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the 1147
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1148

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1149
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1150
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1151

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1152
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1153
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1154
given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut and 1155
it’s an Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Since it’s 1156
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1158
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1159
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There aren’t only less than three 1160
Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet, 1161

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut , 1162

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1163
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut, not: 1164

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not: 1165

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Does includes only less than three SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1166
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1167
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1168
“Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut ” 1169
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1170
Extreme Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut , 1171
is only and only 1172

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1173
5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 1174
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1175
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 1176
SuperHyperClasses. 1177
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 1178

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= z |Vi ∈VN SHG |.
1179
(5.2)
Proof. Let 1180
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. an Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Example (16.5)
1181
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1182
There’s a new way to redefine as 1183
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 1184
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The 1185
latter is straightforward. 1186
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 1187
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 1188
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1189
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1190
Then 1191

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG \ {Ej }}.
X
= z |Ei ∈EN SHG \{Ej }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG \ {VEj }}.
X |V ∈V
= z i N SHG \{VEj }| .
Proof. Let 1192
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1193
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1194

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 1199
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 1200
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1201
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1202

= {Ei , Ej }.
= z |Ei | + z |Ej | .
= {VEi , VEj }.
z |VEi | + z |VEj | .
X
=
Figure 24. an Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.7)
Proof. Let 1203
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1204
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 1205
a new way to redefine as 1206

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 1210
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 1211
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 1212
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 1213
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1214
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1215
Figure 25. an Extreme SuperHyperStar Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.9)
Then 1216

= {Ei ∈ PNmin
SHG }.
X min
= z |Ei ∈PN SHG | .
= {VEi ∈PNmin
SHG
}.
X |V min |
= z Ei ∈PN SHG .
Proof. Let 1217
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
1218
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1219

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1223
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1224
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1225
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1226
the 1227
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut taken from a connected Extreme 1228
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1229
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 1230
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1231
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 1232
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1233
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 1234
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1235
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 1236
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1237
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1238
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1239

= {Ei ∈ PNminSHG }.
X min
= z |Ei ∈PN SHG | .
= {VEi ∈PNmin
SHG
}.
X |V min |
= z Ei ∈PN SHG .
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Example (16.11)
Proof. Let 1240
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1241
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 1243

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1246
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1247
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1248
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1249
Figure 27. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Example (16.13)
the 1250
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1251
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1252
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1255
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1256
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 1257
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 1258
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 1259
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1260
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1261
Then, 1262

= {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 1263
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1264
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1266

latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Thus 1269
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1270
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut could be applied. The unique embedded 1271
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut proposes some longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1272
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1273
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1274
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 1275
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1276
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 1277
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1278
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1279
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1280
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, and the Extreme 1281
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, some general results are introduced. 1282
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is “redefined” 1283
on the positions of the alphabets. 1284
Figure 28. an Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in the Extreme Example (16.15)
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1285
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian − T ype − P ath − Cut =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − T ype − P ath − Cutof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − T ype − P ath − Cut
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−T ype−P ath−Cut. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 1286
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1287
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1288
Corollary 6.3. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 1289
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and 1290
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut coincide. 1291
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is an 1293
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1294
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1296
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1297
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1298
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is its 1299
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and reversely. 1300
Corollary 6.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, 1301
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1302
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1303
its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and reversely. 1304
Corollary 6.8. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1305
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1306
isn’t well-defined. 1307
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1308
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1309
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1310
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1312
Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1313
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut isn’t well-defined. 1314
Corollary 6.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1315
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is 1316
well-defined. 1317
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1318
its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1319
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined. 1320
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1322
Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined if and only if its 1323
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut is well-defined. 1324
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1325
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1326
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1327
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1328
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1329
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1330
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1331
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1332
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1333
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1334
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1335
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1336
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1337
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1338
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1339
independent SuperHyperSet is 1340
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1341
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1342
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1343
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1344
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1345
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1346
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1347
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1348
maximal 1349
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1350
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1351
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1352
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1353
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1354
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1355
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1356
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1357
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1358
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1359
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1360
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1361
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1362
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1363
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1364
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1365
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1367
number of 1368
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1369
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1370
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1371
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1372
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1373
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1374
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1375
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1376
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1378
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1379
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1380
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1381
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1382
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1383
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1384
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1385
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1388
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1389
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1390
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1391
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1395
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1396
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1397
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1400
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1401
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1402
is a 1403
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1407
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1408
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1409
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1412
number of 1413
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1417
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1418
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1419
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1420
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1421
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1422
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1424
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1425
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1429
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1430
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1431
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1432
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1433
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1434
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1435
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1436
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1440
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1442
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1443
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1444
setting of dual 1445
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1449
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1450
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1451
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1453
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1455
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1456
dual 1457
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1461
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1462
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1463
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1465
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1466
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1467
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. 1473
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1474
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1475
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1476
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1477
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1478
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1479
that 1480
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1481
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1482
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1483
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then 1484
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut set; 1485
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1486
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1487
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1488
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1489
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1490
connected. Then 1491
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1492
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1493
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1494
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1495
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1497
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1498
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1499
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1500
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1501
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1502
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1504
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1505
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1506
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1507
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1508
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1509
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1510
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1512
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1513
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1514
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1515
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then 1517
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1518
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1520
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1521
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1522
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1524
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1525
(ii) Γ = 1; 1526
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1527
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1528
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1529
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1530
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1531
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1532
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1533
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1534
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1535
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1536
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1537
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1539
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1540
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1541
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1543
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1544
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1546

bnc ; 1547
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1548
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1550
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1551
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1552
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF; 1553
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1554
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1555
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1556
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1557
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1558
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1559
SuperHyperSet. Then 1560
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1561
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF; 1562
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1563

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1564
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1565
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E). 1566
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1567
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1568
SuperHyperSet. Then 1569
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1570
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut for N SHF : (V, E); 1571
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1572

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1573
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 1574
for N SHF : (V, E). 1575
following statements hold; 1577
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1578
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is an 1579
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1580
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1581
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is a dual 1582
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1583
following statements hold; 1585
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1586
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is an 1587
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1588
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1589
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, then S is a dual 1590
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1591
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1592
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1593
hold; 1594
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1595
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1596
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1597
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1599
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1601
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1602
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1603
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1604
hold; 1605
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1606
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1608
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1610
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1612
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1613
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1615
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1616
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1617
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1619
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1621
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1624
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1626
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1627
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1628
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1630
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1632
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut; 1633
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1635
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1637
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1638
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1639
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1641
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1643
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1646
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1648
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. Then following statements hold; 1649
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1650
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1652
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1654
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1657
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1658
Recognition 1659
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1660
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease is 1661
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1662
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1663
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some Extreme 1664
treatments for this Extreme disease. 1665
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1666
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1667
long-term Extreme function. 1668
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme model 1669
[it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the move 1670
from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer 1671
hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and 1672
neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this event 1673
leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] to 1674
have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1675
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1676
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1677
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1678
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an Extreme 1679
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, SuperHyperStar, 1680
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1681
find either the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut or the Extreme 1682
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut in those Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1683
Figure 29. an Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperBipartite
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1684
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1685
SuperHyperModel 1686
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1687
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1688
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1689
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1690
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1691
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1692
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1693
the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1694
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1695
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1696
SuperHyperModel 1697
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1698
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1699
Figure 30. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1700
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1701
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous result, 1702
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1703
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1704
is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. 1705
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1706
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1707
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1708
The SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut are 1709
defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1710
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1711
recognitions? 1712
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1713
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut? 1714
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1715
compute them? 1716
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1717
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut? 1718
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Extreme 1719
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1720
they’re based on SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, are there else? 1721
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1722
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1723
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1724
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1725
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1726
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1727
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1728
highlighted. 1729
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1730
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1731
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of 1732
the Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on the 1733
new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, Extreme 1734
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, finds the convenient background to implement some results 1735
based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme SuperHyperClasses are the 1736
cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the 1737
cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1738
To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut, the new 1739
SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are 1740
gathered in the section on the SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut and the Extreme 1741
SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have 1742
taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the 1743
lines containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme 1744
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both 1745
bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on 1746
the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the 1747
SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the 1748
moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 1749
and the architecture are formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut” in the themes of 1750
jargons and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded 1751
styles to figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut
3. Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Type-Path-Cut 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1752
and avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1753
12 Extreme SuperHyperDuality But As The 1754
Forms 1756
Definition 12.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperDuality). 1757
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider an 1758
Extreme SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either 1759
V 0 or E 0 is called 1760
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1761
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1762
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1763
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1764
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1765
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1766
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1767
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1768
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1769
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1770
(v) Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1771
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1772
rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1773
Definition 12.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperDuality). 1774
Extreme SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 1776
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1777
e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1778
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an 1779
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 1780
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1781
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1782
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1784
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1785
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1786
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1787
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1788
SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 1789
conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1790
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1791
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1792
Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1793
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1795
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 1796
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1797
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1798
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1799
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1800
Extreme coefficient; 1801
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1802
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1812
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1817
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1819
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1820
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 1824
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1826
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1827
of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1828
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1832
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1833
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1837
Extreme coefficient. 1846
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 1850
E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 1851
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 1852
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, 1853
E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 1854
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1856
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an Extreme 1859
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 1860
only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 1861
V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as 1862
an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in 1863
every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1864


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.

(1 × 1 × 2)z.

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

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



C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1907
Then 1908
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1909
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1913
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1917
Then 1919
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Proof. Let 1920
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1928
Proposition 12.8. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1929
Then 1930
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1931
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1941
Proposition 12.10. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1942
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1943
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1944
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 1949
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1950
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1951
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1952
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1953
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1954
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1962

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1965
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme 1966

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1972
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1983
Then, 1985
∗ ∗
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
Extreme Cardinality
|z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1986
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Extreme Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1987
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1988

∃!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 1993
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1994
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained 1996
Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1997
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1999
13 Extreme SuperHyperJoin But As The 2000
Forms 2002
Definition 13.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperJoin). 2003
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2007
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2008
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2009
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2010
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2012
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2013
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2014
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2015
(v) Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2017
re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2018
Definition 13.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperJoin). 2019
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2022
Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme 2023
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2024
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2028
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2029
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2031
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2035
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2036
Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2037
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2038
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2044
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2046
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2056
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2062
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2063
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2067
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2069
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2070
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2080
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. E1 2093
and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 2094
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2099
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2101
every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2107


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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


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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2151
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin =

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

.
Proof. Let 2152
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2156
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2160
Then 2162

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

.
Proof. Let 2163
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2171
Then 2173
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2174

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2184
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2187
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 2192
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2193
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2194
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2196
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2205

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2208
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2209
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2210

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2213
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2214
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2215
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2226
Then, 2228

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

.
Proof. Let 2229
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2230

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2234
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2235
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2236
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2237
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2242
14 Extreme SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2243
Forms 2245
Definition 14.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperPerfect). 2246
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2250
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2251
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2252
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2253
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2255
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2256
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2257
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2258
(v) Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2260
Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme 2261
rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2262
Definition 14.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperPerfect). 2263
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2266
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2268
SuperHyperPerfect; 2273
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2274
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2276
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2280
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2281
Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2282
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an 2283
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2289
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2291
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2301
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2302
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2306
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2308
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2309
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2310
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2313
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2315
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2316
of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2317
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2326
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2339
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2345
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2353


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2397
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2398
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2402
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2406
Then 2408
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2409
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2417
Then 2419
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2420

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2430
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2433
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 2438
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2439
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2440
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2441
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2442
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2451

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2454
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme 2455

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2459
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2460
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2461
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2472
Then, 2474
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2475
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2476

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2480
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2481
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2482
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2483
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2488
15 Extreme SuperHyperTotal But As The 2489
Forms 2491
Definition 15.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperTotal). 2492
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2496
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2497
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2498
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2499
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2501
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2502
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2503
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2504
(v) Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2506
Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme 2507
rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2508
Definition 15.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperTotal). 2509
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2512
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2514
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2518
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2519
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2521
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2525
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2526
Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme 2527
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2528
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2534
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2536
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2546
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2552
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2553
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2557
such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2559
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2560
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2570
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2583
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2589
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2597


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

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

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


C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2641
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2642
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2646
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2650
Then 2652
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2653
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2661
Then 2663
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2664
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2674
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2677
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2682
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2683
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2686
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2695

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2698
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2699
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2700

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2703
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2704
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2716
Then, 2718
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2719
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2720

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2724
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2725
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2726
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2727
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2732
16 Extreme SuperHyperConnected But As The 2733
Forms 2735
Definition 16.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperConnected). 2736
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2740
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2741
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2742
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2743
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2745
such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2746
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2747
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2748
(v) Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2750
e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2751
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2752
Definition 16.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperConnected). 2753
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2756
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) 2758
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2759
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2760
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2761
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2763
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2764
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2767
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2768
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2769
SuperHyperConnected; 2771
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2772
of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2773
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2775
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2780
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2782
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2783
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2792
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2796
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2797
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2799
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2800
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2804
high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2805
SuperHyperConnected; 2807
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2808
either of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, 2809
Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2810
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2811
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2818
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2819
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 2831
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 2832
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 2833
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 2834
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 2835
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 2836
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 2837
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2838
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 2841
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 2842
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 2843
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 2844
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2846


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

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

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

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

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2910
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2911
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 2915
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2919
Then 2921
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2922
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )|
≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 2925
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2930
Then 2932
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2933
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2943
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2946
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2951
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2952
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2955
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2956
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2964
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2967
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2968

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2972
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2973
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2985
Then, 2987
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2988
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2989

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2993
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2994
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 2995
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 2996
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 3002
17 Background 3003
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3004
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3005
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3006
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3007
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research 3008
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3009
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3010
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3011
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3012
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 1 and issue 1 with pages 3013
06-14. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3014
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3015
results based on initial background. 3016
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating and 3017
Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in 3018
Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3019
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3020
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3021
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3022
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3023
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3024
Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research article studies 3025
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3026
the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3027
SuperHyperNumbers. 3028
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3029
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3030
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [3] by Henry Garrett 3031
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3032
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3033
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3034
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3035
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3036
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3037
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3038
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3039
In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3040
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3041
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3042
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry Garrett 3043
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3044
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3045
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3046
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3047
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by 3048
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3049
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3050
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3051
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3052
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3053
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry 3054
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3055
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3056
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3057
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3058
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3059
Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3060
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3061
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3062
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3063
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3064
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3065
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3066
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3067
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett 3068
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3069
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett 3070
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3071
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3072
in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3073
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3074
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3075
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3076
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [19] by 3077
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3078
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [20] by 3079
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3080
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3081
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3082
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3083
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3084
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3085
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3086
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3087
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3088
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3089
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3090
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3091
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [148] by Henry 3092
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3093
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3094
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [149] by Henry Garrett 3095
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3096
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3097
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [150] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3098
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3099
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3100
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [151] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3101
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [154] by 3103
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3104
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3105
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [155] by Henry 3106
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3107
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3108
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [158] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3109
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3110
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [161] by Henry 3111
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3112
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3113
in Ref. [162] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3114
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3115
Ref. [163] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3116
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3117
Recognition And Beyond” in Ref. [164] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3118
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3119
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [165] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3120
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3121
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [166] by Henry Garrett 3122
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3123
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [177] by Henry 3124
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3125
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3126
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [178] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–178], there 3127
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3128
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books at [179–280]. 3129
Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4190 and 3130
5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [281, 282]. 3131
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3132
proposed as book in Ref. [269] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3133
Scholar and has more than 4276 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3134
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3135
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 3136
theory. 3137
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3138
proposed as book in Ref. [270] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3139
Scholar and has more than 5274 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3140
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3141
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3142
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3143
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3144
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3145
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3146
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3147
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in SuperHyperGraphs 3148
theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–178] alongside scientific 3149
research books at [179–280]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms 3150
of high readers, 4276 and 5274 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [281, 282]. 3151
References 3152
1. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3153
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3154
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 1(1) (2022) 06-14. 3155
2. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3156
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3157
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3158
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3159
3. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3160
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3161
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3162
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3163
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3164
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3165
4. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancers Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3166
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3167
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3168
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3169
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by-eulerian- 3170
super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3171
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3172
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3173
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3174
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3175
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3176
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3177
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3178
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3179
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3180
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3181
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3182
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3183
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3184
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3185
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3186
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3187
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3188
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3189
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3190
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3191
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3192
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3193
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3194
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3195
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3196
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3197
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3198
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3199
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3200
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3201
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3202
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3203
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3204
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3205
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3206
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3207
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3208
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3209
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3210
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3211
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3212
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3213
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3214
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3215
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3216
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3217
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3218
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3219
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3220
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3221
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3222
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3223
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3224
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3225
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3226
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3228
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3232
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3233
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3234
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3235
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3236
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3237
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3238
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3239
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3240
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3241
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3242
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3243
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3244
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3245
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3246
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3247
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3248
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3249
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3250
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3251
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3252
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3253
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3254
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3256
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7824560). 3257
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3258
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3259
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7824623). 3260
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3262
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819531). 3263
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3264
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3265
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3268
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3269
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3271
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3272
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3274
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3275
33. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3276
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3277
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3280
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809328). 3281
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3283
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3284
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3286
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3289
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3290
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3291
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3293
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3294
10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3295
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3297
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3298
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3299
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3300
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3303
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3306
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3307
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3309
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3310
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3312
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3315
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3318
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3321
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3322
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3324
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3327
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3330
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3333
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3336
53. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3338
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3339
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3340
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3342
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3345
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3346
56. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3347
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3348
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3349
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3351
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3354
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3357
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3358
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3360
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3361
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3363
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3364
62. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3365
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3366
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3367
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3369
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3372
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3375
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3376
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3378
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3381
68. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3383
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3385
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3387
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3389
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3390
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3393
72. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3395
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3396
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3399
74. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3401
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3403
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3405
76. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3407
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3408
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3411
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3412
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3414
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3417
80. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3419
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3421
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3423
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3424
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3426
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3428
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3430
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark”, ResearchGate 3432
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3433
85. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3434
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3435
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3436
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3438
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3439
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3440
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3441
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3444
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3446
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3447
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3450
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3452
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3453
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3456
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3458
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3460
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3462
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3463
95. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3464
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3465
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3468
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3469
97. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3470
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3471
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3474
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3475
99. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3476
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3477
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3480
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3481
101. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3482
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3483
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3486
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3487
103. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3488
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3489
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3492
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3493
105. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3494
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3495
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3497
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3498
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3501
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3502
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3503
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3504
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3507
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3508
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3509
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3510
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3513
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3515
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3516
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3519
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3521
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3522
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3524
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3525
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3528
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3531
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3533
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3534
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3536
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3537
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3539
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3540
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3541
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3542
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3543
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3544
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3545
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3546
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3548
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3549
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3550
124. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3551
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3552
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3553
125. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3554
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3555
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3556
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3557
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3560
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3561
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3564
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3565
128. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3566
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3568
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3569
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3572
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3573
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3576
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3577
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3578
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3579
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3580
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3581
132. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3582
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3583
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3584
133. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3585
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3586
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3587
134. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3588
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3589
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3590
135. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3591
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3592
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3593
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3594
136. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3595
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3596
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3597
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3598
137. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3599
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3600
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3601
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3602
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3603
138. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3604
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3605
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3606
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3607
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3608
139. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3609
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3610
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3611
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3612
140. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3613
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3614
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3615
141. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3616
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3617
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3619
142. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3620
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3621
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3622
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3623
143. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3624
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3625
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3626
144. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3627
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3628
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3629
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3630
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3631
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3632
145. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3633
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3634
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3635
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3636
146. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3637
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3638
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3639
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3640
147. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3641
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3642
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3643
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3644
148. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3645
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3646
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3647
149. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3648
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3649
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3650
150. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3652
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3653
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3654
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3655
151. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3656
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3657
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3658
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3659
152. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3660
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3661
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3662
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3663
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3665
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3666
154. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3667
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3668
155. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3670
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3671
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3672
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3677
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3681
158. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3682
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3683
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3684
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3685
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3688
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3690
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3691
161. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3692
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3693
In Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3697
10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3698
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3700
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3701
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3704
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3705
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3707
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3708
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3711
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3712
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3714
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3715
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3717
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3722
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3723
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3727
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3728
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3731
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3734
173. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3735
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3736
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3737
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3738
174. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3739
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3740
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3741
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3742
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3745
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3746
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3749
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3750
177. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning 3751
SuperHyperDominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in 3752
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3753
178. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3754
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3755
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3756
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3757
179. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3758
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7826705). 3759
180. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3760
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7820680). 3761
181. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3762
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 3763
182. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3764
183. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3766
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 3767
184. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3768
185. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3770
186. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3772
187. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3774
188. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3776
189. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3778
190. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3780
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3781
191. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3782
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3783
192. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3784
193. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3786
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3787
194. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3788
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3789
195. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3790
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3791
196. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3792
197. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3794
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3795
198. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3796
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3797
199. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3798
200. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3800
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3801
201. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3802
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3803
202. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3804
203. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3806
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3807
204. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3808
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3809
205. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3810
206. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3812
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3813
207. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3814
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3815
208. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3816
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3817
209. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3818
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3819
210. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3820
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 3821
211. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3822
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 3823
212. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3824
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 3825
213. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3826
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 3827
214. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3828
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 3829
215. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3830
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 3831
216. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3832
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 3833
217. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3834
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 3835
218. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3836
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 3837
219. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3838
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 3839
220. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3840
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 3841
221. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3842
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 3843
222. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3844
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 3845
223. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3846
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 3847
224. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3848
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 3849
225. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3850
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 3851
226. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3852
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 3853
227. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3854
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 3855
228. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3856
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 3857
229. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3858
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 3859
230. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3860
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 3861
231. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3862
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 3863
232. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3864
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 3865
233. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3866
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 3867
234. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3868
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 3869
235. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3870
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3871
236. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3872
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3873
237. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3874
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 3875
238. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3876
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3877
239. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3878
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3879
240. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3880
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3881
241. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3882
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 3883
242. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3884
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 3885
243. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3886
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 3887
244. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3888
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3889
245. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3890
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3891
246. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3892
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3893
247. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3894
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 3895
248. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3896
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 3897
249. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3898
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3899
250. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3900
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3901
251. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3902
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3903
252. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3904
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3905
253. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3906
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 3907
254. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3908
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 3909
255. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3910
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3911
256. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3912
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3913
257. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3914
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3915
258. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3916
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3917
259. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3918
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3919
260. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3920
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3921
261. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3922
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3923
262. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3924
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3925
263. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3926
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3927
264. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3928
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3929
265. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3930
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3931
266. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3932
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3933
267. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3934
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3935
268. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3936
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3937
269. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3938
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3939
270. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3940
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3941
271. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3942
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3943
272. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3944
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3945
273. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3946
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3947
274. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3948
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3949
275. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3950
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3951
276. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3952
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3953
277. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3954
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3955
278. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3956
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3957
279. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3958
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 3959
280. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3960
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 3961
281. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3962
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 3963
282. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3964
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 3965
View publication stats

New Ideas On Super EULA by Hyper Eulogy of Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Ideas On Super EULA by Hyper Eulogy of Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut in Cancer's Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In

Preprint · April 2023

447 PUBLICATIONS 12,464 CITATIONS

On Combinatorics View project

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 2

Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With 3

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperEulerian-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

coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 60