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

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/370214377
New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In

Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph
Preprint · April 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7857841
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
460 PUBLICATIONS 14,316 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 24 April 2023.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA
New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 2
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer 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-Cycle-Neighbor). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is 10
a Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 14
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
a SuperHyperCycle and it has
the all number of SuperHyperEdges;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 16
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 19
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 21
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 23
e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 24
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor). 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-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 32
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 33
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive 34
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; a Neutrosophic 36
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; 44
an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 45
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 46
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and 47
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; and 53
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 54
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 64
Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; a 72
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; 80
an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; and 89
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 90
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor and Neutrosophic 102
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 122
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 123
(Neutrosophic) 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor . Since there’s more ways to get type-results 135
to make a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor more understandable. For the sake of having 136
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 137
“SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor ”. 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-Cycle-Neighbor . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 141
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor . 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-Cycle-Neighbor until the 152
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then it’s officially called a “SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” 153
but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor . There are some instances about 154
the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor ”. 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-Cycle-Neighbor . For 157
the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a need to 158
“redefine” the notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” and a 159
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor ”. 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-Cycle-Neighbor are redefined to a 164
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” 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-Cycle-Neighbor more 167
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 168
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 169
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 170
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 171
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”, “Neutrosophic 172
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 173
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 174
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” where 175
it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the 176
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices 177
from a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor .] SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor . 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 212
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 213
either the longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor or the strongest 214
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the 215
longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, called SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and the 216
strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, called Neutrosophic 217
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor. There isn’t any formation of any 221
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 222
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 223
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor theory, SuperHyperGraphs, 224
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 225
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor” 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-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 273
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 274
either the optimal SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor or the Extreme 275
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. There isn’t 279
any formation of any SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of 280
any SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor” 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-Cycle-Neighbor” 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-Cycle-Neighbor” and “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” 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-Cycle-Neighbor 304
and Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, are figured out in sections “ 305
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” and “Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”. In the 306
sense of tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor”, 319
“Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”, “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-Cycle-Neighbor”. 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. [185],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 336
Set](Ref. [185],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 337
(NSHG)](Ref. [185],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 338
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [185],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [185], 339
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 340
(NSHG)](Ref. [185],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 341
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [185],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 342
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [185],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 343
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [185]. 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. [185],Definition 2.1,p.1). 347
Let X be a Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted

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

+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a
truth-membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets of 348
+
]− 0, 1 [. 349
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [185],Definition 2.2,p.2). 350
Let X be a Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor of points (objects) with generic elements in X denoted

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

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

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

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [185],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. [185],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. [185], 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. [185],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. [185],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. [185],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-Cycle-Neighbor). 509
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 511
either V 0 or E 0 is called 512
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 513
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 514
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 515
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 516
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 517
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 518
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 519
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 520
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 521
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 522
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 523
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 526
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor). 527
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 529
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 530
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 533
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 534
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 535
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 536
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 537
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 538
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 539
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 542
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 543
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 544
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 545
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 547
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 548
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 549
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 550
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 557
its Extreme coefficient; 558
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 559
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 560
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 571
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 574
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 575
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 576
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 577
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 579
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; 588
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 589
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 598
its Extreme coefficient; 599
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor). 612
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 613
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 614
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of 619
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 644
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor more Neutrosophicly understandable. 645
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a need 646
to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. It’s redefined a 651
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the Table (3) holds. 652
4 Extreme SuperHyper But As The

Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Any k-function Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor like E is 670
called Extreme k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Let m and n propose special 684
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Let X be a 723
nonnegative 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Let Xn be a 727
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor (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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Let Xn be an Extreme 764
Variable in a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor (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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 776
result is straightforward. 777
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. The latter is straightforward. 785
Definition 4.17. (Extreme Threshold). 786
S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 815
C(N SHG)Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor
= {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.3)
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 825

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

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




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
834

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
838


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
842

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
846




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
850

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
854


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
858

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



862

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
866

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

870

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
874

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


878

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
882

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
886




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
890

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

894

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
898

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

902

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 928
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Then
the Extreme number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor has, the least Extreme cardinality,
the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality, is the Extreme cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s an Extreme type-result-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor with the least Extreme cardinality, 929
the 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−Cycle−N eighbor

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

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

propose property such that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperVertex of 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-Cycle-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp

bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is the cardinality of
Then we’ve lost some connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the connected
loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and their
quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. It’s
the contradiction to that fact on the generality. There are some counterexamples to
deny this statement. One of them comes from the setting of the graph titled path and
cycle as the counterexamples-classes or reversely direction star as the examples-classes,
are well-known classes in that setting and they could be considered as the
examples-classes and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
Let V \ V \ {z} in mind. There’s no necessity on the SuperHyperEdge since we need at 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-Cycle-Neighbor decorates the Extreme

SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Extreme connections so as this Extreme
style implies different versions of Extreme SuperHyperEdges with the maximum
Extreme cardinality in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The
lower Extreme bound is to have the maximum Extreme groups of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have perfect Extreme connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges
and the outside of this Extreme SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the
connectedness of the used Extreme SuperHyperGraph arising from its Extreme
properties taken from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Extreme
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Extreme SuperHyperSet, then there’s no Extreme
connection. Furthermore, the Extreme existence of one Extreme SuperHyperVertex has
no Extreme effect to talk about the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since at least two
Extreme SuperHyperVertices involve to make a title in the Extreme background of the
Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The Extreme SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no
Extreme SuperHyperEdge but at least two Extreme SuperHyperVertices make the
Extreme version of Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Extreme setting of
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is used as Extreme
adjective for the initial Extreme SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no Extreme
appearance of the loop Extreme version of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge and this
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The Extreme adjective “loop” on the
basic Extreme framework engages one Extreme SuperHyperVertex but it never happens
in this Extreme setting. With these Extreme bases, on an Extreme SuperHyperGraph,
there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at least an Extreme
R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor has the Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus,
an Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor since either the Extreme
SuperHyperGraph is an obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel thus it never happens since
there’s no Extreme usage of this Extreme framework and even more there’s no Extreme
connection inside or the Extreme SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious and as its
consequences, there’s an Extreme contradiction with the term “Extreme
R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” since the maximum Extreme cardinality never happens for this
Extreme style of the Extreme SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no Extreme
connection inside as mentioned in first Extreme case in the forms of drawback for this
selected Extreme SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Extreme case implies having the Extreme style of on-quasi-triangle
Extreme style on the every Extreme elements of this Extreme SuperHyperSet. Precisely,
the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices such that some Extreme amount of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle Extreme style. The Extreme cardinality of the
v SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Extreme SuperHyperSet
But the lower Extreme bound is up. Thus the minimum Extreme cardinality of the
maximum Extreme cardinality ends up the Extreme discussion. The first Extreme term
refers to the Extreme setting of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph but this key point is
enough since there’s 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. Those Extreme SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in an
Extreme style-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor but
with slightly differences in the maximum Extreme cardinality amid those Extreme
type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus the Extreme
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Extreme cardinality ,

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let

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

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Extreme intended
SuperHyperVertices but in an Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could
be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Extreme
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme
R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor 968
where the Extreme completion of the Extreme incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 969
literarily, an Extreme embedded R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor. The Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor with the 990
exclusion of the exclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme 991
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor with the 992
inclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, is an 993
Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor, minus 1000
all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1001
The main definition of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor has two titles. an Extreme 1002
quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbors for all Extreme numbers less than its Extreme corresponded 1009
maximum number. The essence of the Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor ends up but this 1010
essence starts up in the terms of the Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, again and more 1011
in the operations of collecting all the Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbors 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-Cycle-Neighbors. 1015
Let zExtreme Number , SExtreme SuperHyperSet and GExtreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor be an 1016
Extreme number, an Extreme SuperHyperSet and an Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1017
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class = {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |

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

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number
{SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1020
technical definition for the Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1021
GExtreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor =
{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number |
= max zExtreme Number }.
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Extreme 1022
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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
= maxzExtreme 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-Cycle-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


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

1028
= max zExtreme Number

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-Cycle-Neighbor” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of “Extreme 1034
Quasi-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” since “Extreme Quasi-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” happens “Extreme 1035
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1036
background but “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Extreme 1037
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” 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-Cycle-Neighbor”, and “Extreme 1041
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” are up. 1042
Thus, let 1043
zExtreme Number , NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1044
GExtreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor be an Extreme number, an Extreme 1045
SuperHyperNeighborhood and an Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the new terms are up. 1046
GExtreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor ∈ ∪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-Cycle-Neighbor ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


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

1052
= max zExtreme Number

1053

Thus, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1054
Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if for 1055
any 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-Cycle-Neighbor.
The Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. The

Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor is related to the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the

Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex inside the intended Extreme
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is up. The obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor is
up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme

R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor and it’s an Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. There isn’t only less than
two Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor,
is up. The non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme

Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor” 1076
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1077
Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor amid those obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor, VESHE is 1111
up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1112
R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−Cycle−N eighbor = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−Eulerian−Cycle−N eighborSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor is up. The obvious simple Extreme 1141
type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor and 1155
it’s an Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 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-Cycle-Neighbor , 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-Cycle-Neighbor, 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-Cycle-Neighbor” 1169
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1170
Extreme Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor , 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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1179
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1180
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. an Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1191
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1192
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). 1193

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 1198
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 1199
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1200
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1201

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1202
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1203
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
Figure 24. an Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.7)
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 1204
a new way to redefine as 1205

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 1209
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 1210
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 1211
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 1212
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1213
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1214
Then 1215

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

SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1216
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
1217
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). 1218

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1222
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1223
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1224
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.11)
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1225
the 1226
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor taken from a connected Extreme 1227
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1228
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 1229
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1230
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 1231
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1232
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 1233
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1234
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 1235
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1236
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1237
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1238

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1239
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
1240
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 1242

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1245
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1246
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1247
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1248
the 1249
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1250
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1251
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Figure 27. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.13)
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1254
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1255
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 1256
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 1257
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 1258
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1259
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1260
Then, 1261

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1262
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1263
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
Figure 28. an Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Extreme Example (16.15)
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1265

latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Thus 1268
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1269
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. The unique embedded 1270
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor proposes some longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 1271
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1272
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1273
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 1274
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1275
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 1276
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1277
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1278
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1279
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and the 1280
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. 1281
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is “redefined” 1282
on the positions of the alphabets. 1283
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1284
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian − Cycle − N eighbor =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − Cycle − N eighborof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − Cycle − N eighbor
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−Cycle−N eighbor. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 1285
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1286
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1287
Corollary 6.3. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 1288
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and 1289
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor coincide. 1290
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is an 1292
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1293
the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1295
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1296
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1297
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is its 1298
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and reversely. 1299
Corollary 6.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 1300
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1301
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1302
its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and reversely. 1303
Corollary 6.8. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1304
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 1305
isn’t well-defined. 1306
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1307
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1308
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1309
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1311
Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1312
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1313
Corollary 6.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1314
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1315
well-defined. 1316
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1317
its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1318
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined. 1319
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1321
Then its Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1322
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined. 1323
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1324
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1325
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1326
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1327
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1328
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1329
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1330
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1331
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1332
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1333
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1334
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1335
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1336
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1337
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1338
independent SuperHyperSet is 1339
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1340
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1341
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1342
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1343
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1344
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1345
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1346
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1347
maximal 1348
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1349
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1350
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1351
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1352
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1353
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1354
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1355
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1356
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1357
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1358
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1359
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1360
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1361
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1362
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1363
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1364
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1366
number of 1367
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1368
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1369
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1370
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1371
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1372
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1373
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1374
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1375
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1377
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1378
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1379
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1380
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1381
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1382
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1383
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1384
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1387
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1388
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1389
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1390
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1394
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1395
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1396
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1399
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1400
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1401
is a 1402
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1406
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1407
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1408
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1411
number of 1412
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1416
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1417
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1418
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1419
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1420
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1421
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1423
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1424
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1428
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1429
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1430
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1431
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1432
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1433
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1434
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1435
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1439
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1441
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1442
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1443
setting of dual 1444
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1448
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1449
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1450
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1452
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1454
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1455
dual 1456
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1460
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1461
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1462
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1464
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1465
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1466
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1472
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1473
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1474
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1475
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1476
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1477
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1478
that 1479
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1480
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1481
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1482
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then 1483
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor set; 1484
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1485
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1486
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1487
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1488
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1489
connected. Then 1490
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1491
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1492
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1493
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1494
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1496
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1497
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1498
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1499
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1500
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1501
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1503
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1504
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1505
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1506
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1507
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1508
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1509
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1511
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1512
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1513
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1514
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1516
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1517
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1519
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1520
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1521
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1523
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1524
(ii) Γ = 1; 1525
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1526
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1527
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1528
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1529
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1530
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1531
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1532
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1533
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1534
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1535
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1536
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1538
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1539
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1540
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1542
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1543
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1545

bnc ; 1546
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1547
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1549
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1550
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1551
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF; 1552
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1553
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1554
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1555
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1556
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1557
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1558
SuperHyperSet. Then 1559
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1560
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF; 1561
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1562

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1563
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1564
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1565
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1566
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1567
SuperHyperSet. Then 1568
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1569
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E); 1570
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1571

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1572
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 1573
for N SHF : (V, E). 1574
following statements hold; 1576
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1577
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is an 1578
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1579
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1580
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1581
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1582
following statements hold; 1584
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1585
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is an 1586
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1587
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1588
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1589
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1590
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1591
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1592
hold; 1593
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1594
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1595
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1596
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1598
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1600
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1601
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1602
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1603
hold; 1604
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1605
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1607
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1609
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1611
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1612
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1614
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1615
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1616
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1618
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1620
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1623
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1625
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1626
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1627
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1629
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1631
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1632
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1634
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1636
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1637
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1638
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1640
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1642
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1645
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1647
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1648
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1649
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1651
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1653
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1656
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1657
Recognition 1658
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1659
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease 1660
is considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1661
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1662
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some 1663
Extreme treatments for this Extreme disease. 1664
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1665
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1666
long-term Extreme function. 1667
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme 1668
model [it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the 1669
move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the 1670
cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy 1671
and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this 1672
event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] 1673
to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1674
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1675
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1676
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1677
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an Extreme 1678
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 1679
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1680
find either the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor or the Extreme 1681
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1682
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1683
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1684
SuperHyperModel 1685
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1686
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1687
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1688
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1689
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1690
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1691
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1692
the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1693
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1694
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1695
SuperHyperModel 1696
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1697
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1698
Figure 29. an Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

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

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

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

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1699
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1700
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1701
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1703
is the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1704
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1705
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1706
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1707
The SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor are 1708
defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1709
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1710
recognitions? 1711
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1712
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor? 1713
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1714
compute them? 1715
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1716
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor? 1717
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme 1718
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1719
they’re based on SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, are there else? 1720
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1721
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1722
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1723
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1724
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1725
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1726
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1727
highlighted. 1728
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1729
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1730
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition 1731
of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based 1732
on the new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1733
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, finds the convenient background to implement 1734
some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Extreme 1735
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1736
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1737
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1738
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are 1739
introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on the 1740
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. The 1741
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In 1742
this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1743
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 1744
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1745
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1746
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1747
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1748
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1749
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1750
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1751
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor
3. Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1752
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
0 0
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 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
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
0 0
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E , ∃Ej ∈ E , 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
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 2025
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 2026
the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2027
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
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2060
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2061
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
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 2272
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
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
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2550
in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and 2551
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 “Super Hyper Dominating 3006
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3007
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett 3008
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3009
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3010
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3011
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3012
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3013
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3014
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3015
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3016
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3017
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3018
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3019
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3020
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3021
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3022
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3023
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3024
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3025
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3026
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3027
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3028
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3029
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3030
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3031
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3032
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3033
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3034
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3035
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3036
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3037
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3038
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3039
SuperHyperNumbers. 3040
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3041
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3042
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research 3043
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3044
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3045
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3046
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3047
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 2 and issue 1 with pages 3048
16-24. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3049
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3050
results based on initial background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing 3051
Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside 3052
(Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 3053
(2022), “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by 3054
Henry Garrett (2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3055
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3056
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty 3057
On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward 3058
Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled 3059
Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of 3060
Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” 3061
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The 3062
Cells and Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3063
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) 3064
SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3065
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and 3066
Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed 3067
SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3068
in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the 3069
Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes 3070
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism 3071
of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition 3072
Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3073
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3074
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 3075
Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on 3076
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry 3077
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction 3078
To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And 3079
Beyond ” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on 3080
Cancer’s Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” 3081
in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3082
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3083
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3084
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3085
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3086
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3087
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3088
in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3089
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3090
Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3091
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3092
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3093
And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3094
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3095
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3096
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3097
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3098
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3099
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3100
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3101
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3102
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [155] by Henry 3103
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3104
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3105
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [156] by Henry Garrett 3106
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3107
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3108
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [157] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3109
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3110
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3111
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [158] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3112
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3113
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [161] by 3114
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3115
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3116
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [162] by Henry 3117
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3118
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3119
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [165] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3120
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3121
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [168] by Henry 3122
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3123
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3124
in Ref. [169] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3125
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3126
Ref. [170] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3127
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3128
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [171] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3129
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3130
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [172] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3131
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3132
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [173] by Henry Garrett 3133
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3134
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [184] by Henry 3135
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3136
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3137
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [185] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–185], there 3138
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3139
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3140
at [186–292]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3141
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [293, 294]. 3142
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3143
proposed as book in Ref. [281] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3144
Scholar and has more than 4331 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3145
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3146
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3147
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3148
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3149
proposed as book in Ref. [282] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3150
Scholar and has more than 5327 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3151
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3152
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3153
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3154
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3155
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3156
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3157
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3158
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3159
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–185] 3160
alongside scientific research books at [186–292]. Two popular scientific research books 3161
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4331 and 5327 respectively, on neutrosophic 3162
science is on [293, 294]. 3163
References 3164
1. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3165
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3166
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3167
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3168
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3169
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3170
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3171
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3172
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3173
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3174
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3175
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3176
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3177
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3178
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3179
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3180
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3181
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3182
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. 3183
(https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/neutrosophic-codegree- 3184
and-neutrosophic-degree-alongside-chromatic-numbers-in-the-setting-of-some- 3185
classes-related-to-neut.pdf) 3186
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3187
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3188
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3189
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3190
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3191
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3192
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3193
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3194
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3195
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3196
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3197
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3198
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3200
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3201
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3202
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3203
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3204
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3205
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3206
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3207
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3208
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3209
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3210
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3211
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3212
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3213
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3214
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3215
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3216
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3217
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3218
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3219
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3220
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3221
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3222
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3223
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3224
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3225
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3226
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3227
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3228
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3229
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3230
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3231
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3232
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3233
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3234
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3235
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3236
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3237
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3238
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3239
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3240
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3241
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3243
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3247
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3248
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3249
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3250
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3251
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3252
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3253
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3254
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3255
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3256
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3257
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3258
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3259
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3260
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3261
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3262
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3263
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3264
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3265
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3266
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3267
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3268
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7853867). 3269
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3270
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3271
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7853922). 3272
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3274
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7851519). 3275
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3276
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3277
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3280
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3281
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3282
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3283
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3286
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3287
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3289
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3292
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3295
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3298
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819531). 3299
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3301
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3304
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3305
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3307
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3308
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3310
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3311
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3313
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3316
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3319
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3320
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3322
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3325
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3326
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3327
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3329
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3330
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3332
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3333
47. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3334
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3335
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3338
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3341
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3342
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3344
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3345
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3347
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3350
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3353
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3356
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3357
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3359
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3362
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3365
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3368
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3371
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3373
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3374
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3375
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3377
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3380
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3381
63. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3382
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3383
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3384
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3386
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3389
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3392
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3393
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3395
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3396
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3398
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3399
69. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3400
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3401
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3402
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3404
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3407
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3410
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3411
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3413
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3416
75. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3418
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3420
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3422
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3424
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3425
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3428
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3430
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3431
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3434
81. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3436
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3438
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3440
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3442
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3443
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3446
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3447
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3449
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3452
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3454
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3456
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3458
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3459
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3461
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3463
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3465
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3467
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3468
92. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3469
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3470
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3471
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3473
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3474
94. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3475
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3476
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3479
96. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3481
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3482
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3485
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3487
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3488
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3491
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3493
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3495
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3497
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3498
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3499
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3500
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3503
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3504
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3505
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3506
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3509
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3510
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3511
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3512
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3515
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3516
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3517
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3518
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3521
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3522
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3523
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3524
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3527
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3528
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3529
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3530
113. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3532
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3533
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3536
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3537
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3538
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3539
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3542
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3543
117. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3544
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3545
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3548
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3550
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3551
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3554
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3556
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3557
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3559
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3560
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3563
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3566
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3568
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3569
126. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3571
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3572
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3574
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3575
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3576
128. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3577
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3578
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3579
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3580
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3581
130. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3583
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3584
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3585
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3586
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3587
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3588
132. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3589
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3590
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3591
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3592
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3595
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3596
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3599
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3600
135. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3601
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3603
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3604
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3607
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3608
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3611
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3612
138. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3613
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3614
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3615
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3616
139. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3617
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3618
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3619
140. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3620
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3621
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3622
141. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3623
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3624
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3625
142. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3626
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3627
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3628
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3629
143. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3630
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3631
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3632
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3633
144. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3634
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3635
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3636
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3637
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3638
145. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3639
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3640
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3641
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3642
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3643
146. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3644
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3645
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3646
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3647
147. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3648
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3649
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3650
148. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3651
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3654
149. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3655
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3656
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3657
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3658
150. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3659
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3660
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3661
151. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3662
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3663
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3664
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3665
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3666
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3667
152. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3668
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3669
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3670
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3671
153. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3672
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3673
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3674
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3675
154. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3676
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3677
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3678
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3679
155. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3680
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3681
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3682
156. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3683
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3684
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3685
157. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3687
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3688
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3689
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3690
158. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3691
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3692
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3693
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3694
159. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3695
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3696
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3697
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3698
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3700
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3701
161. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3702
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3703
162. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3705
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3706
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3707
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3712
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3716
165. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3717
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3718
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3719
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3720
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3723
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3725
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3726
168. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3727
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3728
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3731
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3732
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3734
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3735
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3738
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3739
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3741
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3742
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3745
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3746
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3748
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3749
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3751
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3756
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3757
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3761
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3762
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3765
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3768
180. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3769
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3770
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3771
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3772
181. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3773
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3774
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3775
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3776
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3779
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3780
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3783
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3784
184. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3785
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3786
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3787
185. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3788
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3789
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3790
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3791
186. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3792
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7856329). 3793
187. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3794
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 3795
188. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3796
189. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3798
190. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3800
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7835063). 3801
191. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3802
192. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3804
193. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3806
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 3807
194. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3808
195. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3810
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 3811
196. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3812
197. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3814
198. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3816
199. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3818
200. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3820
201. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3822
202. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3824
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3825
203. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3826
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 3827
204. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3828
205. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3830
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 3831
206. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3832
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 3833
207. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3834
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 3835
208. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3836
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 3837
209. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3838
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 3839
210. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3840
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 3841
211. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3842
212. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3844
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 3845
213. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3846
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 3847
214. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3848
215. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3850
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 3851
216. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3852
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 3853
217. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3854
218. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3856
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 3857
219. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3858
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 3859
220. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3860
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 3861
221. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3862
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 3863
222. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3864
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 3865
223. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3866
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 3867
224. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3868
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 3869
225. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3870
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 3871
226. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3872
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 3873
227. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3874
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 3875
228. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3876
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 3877
229. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3878
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 3879
230. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3880
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 3881
231. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3882
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 3883
232. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3884
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 3885
233. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3886
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 3887
234. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3888
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 3889
235. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3890
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 3891
236. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3892
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 3893
237. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3894
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 3895
238. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3896
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 3897
239. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3898
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 3899
240. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3900
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 3901
241. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3902
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 3903
242. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3904
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 3905
243. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3906
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 3907
244. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3908
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 3909
245. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3910
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 3911
246. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3912
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 3913
247. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3914
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3915
248. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3916
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 3917
249. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3918
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 3919
250. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3920
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3921
251. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3922
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3923
252. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3924
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 3925
253. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3926
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 3927
254. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3928
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 3929
255. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3930
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 3931
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3932
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3933
257. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3934
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3935
258. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3936
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 3937
259. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3938
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 3939
260. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3940
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 3941
261. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3942
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3943
262. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3944
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3945
263. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3946
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3947
264. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3948
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3949
265. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3950
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 3951
266. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3952
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 3953
267. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3954
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3955
268. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3956
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3957
269. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3958
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3959
270. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3960
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3961
271. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3962
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3963
272. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3964
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3965
273. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3966
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3967
274. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3968
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3969
275. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3970
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3971
276. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3972
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3973
277. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3974
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3975
278. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3976
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3977
279. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3978
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3979
280. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3980
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3981
281. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3982
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3983
282. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3984
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 3985
283. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3986
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 3987
284. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3988
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 3989
285. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3990
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 3991
286. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3992
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 3993
287. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3994
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 3995
288. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3996
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 3997
289. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3998
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 3999
290. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4000
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4001
291. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4002
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4003
292. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4004
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4005
293. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4006
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4007
294. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4008
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4009
View publication stats

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

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

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

Preprint · April 2023

460 PUBLICATIONS 14,316 CITATIONS

On Combinatorics View project

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 2

Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer 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-Cycle-Neighbor). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is 10

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

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

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 14

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 16

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

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

v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 19

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 21

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

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

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

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

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor). 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-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 29

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

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

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

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

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

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 35

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

SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 37

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 38

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 39

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; 44

an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 45

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 46

re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and 47

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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-Cycle-Neighbor; and 53

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

SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 55

e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 56

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and Neutrosophic 57

rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 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