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

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/370214523
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

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

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7857856
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:
Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project
Number Graphs And Numbers 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 In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper 3
Nebbish On Super Nebulous 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperEulerian-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 “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 240
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 241
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 242
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 243
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 244
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 245
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 246
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 247
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 248
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 249
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 250
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 251
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 252
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 253
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 254
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 255
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 256
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 257
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 258
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 259
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 260
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-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
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 269
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 270
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 271
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 272
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 273
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 274
either the optimal SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor or the Neutrosophic 275
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general 276
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic 277
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 278
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 279
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. There isn’t any formation of any 280
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 281
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 282
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 283
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” of either individual of cells or the 284
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 285
of SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 286
group of cells? 287
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 288
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 289
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 290
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 291
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” on 292
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 293
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 294
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 295
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 296
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 297
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 298
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 299
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 300
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 301
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 302
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 303
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 304
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 305
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, are figured out in sections “ 306
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”. In the 307
sense of tackling on getting results and in Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor to make sense about 308
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 309
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 310
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 311
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. As going 312
back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 313
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 314
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 315
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 316
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 317
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 318
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 319
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”, 320
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 321
“Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 322
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 323
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 324
presented in section, “ SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor”. The keyword of this research 325
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 326
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 327
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 328
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 329
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 330
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 331
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 332
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 333
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 334
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 335
Research On the Redeemed Ways 336
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 337
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [185],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 338
Set](Ref. [185],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 339
(NSHG)](Ref. [185],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 340
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [185],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [185], 341
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 342
(NSHG)](Ref. [185],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 343
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [185],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 344
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [185],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 345
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [185]. 346
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 347
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 348
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [185],Definition 2.1,p.1). 349
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 350
+
]− 0, 1 [. 351
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [185],Definition 2.2,p.2). 352
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 353
2.5,p.2). 354
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 355
pair S = (V, E), where 356
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 357
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 358
1, 2, . . . , n); 359
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 360
V; 361
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 362
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 363
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 364
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 365
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 366
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 367
(ix) and the following conditions hold:
TV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[TV 0 (Vi ), TV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,
IV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[IV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0 ,

and FV0 (Ei0 ) ≤ min[FV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vj )]Vi ,Vj ∈Ei0
where i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 . 368
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 369
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 370
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 371
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 372
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 373
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 374
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 375
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 376
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 377
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 378
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 379
(Ref. [185],Definition 2.7,p.3). 380
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 381
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 382
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 383
characterized as follow-up items. 384
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 385
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 386
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 387
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 388
HyperEdge; 389
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 390
SuperEdge; 391
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 392
SuperHyperEdge. 393
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 394
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 395
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [185], Definition 2.7, p.3). 396
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 397
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 398
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 399
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 400
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 401
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 402
Definition 3.8. The degree of truth-membership, indeterminacy-membership

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

and FA (X) = Tnorm [FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 3.9. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued Neutrosophic set
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.10. (General Forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 403
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 404
pair S = (V, E), where 405
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 406
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 407
1, 2, . . . , n); 408
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 409
V; 410
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 411
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 412
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 413
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 414
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 415
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 416
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 417
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 418
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 419
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 420
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 421
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 422
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 423
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 424
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 425
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 426
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 427
(Ref. [185],Definition 2.7,p.3). 428
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 429
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 430
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 431
characterized as follow-up items. 432
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 433
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 434
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 435
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 436
HyperEdge; 437
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 438
SuperEdge; 439
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 440
SuperHyperEdge. 441
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 442
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 443
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 444
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 445
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 446
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 447
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 448
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 449
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 450
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 451
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 452
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 453
given SuperHyperEdges; 454
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 455
SuperHyperEdges; 456
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 457
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 458
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 459
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 460
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 461
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 462
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 463
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 464
common SuperVertex. 465
Definition 3.14. Let a pair S = (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)

S. Then a sequence of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 466
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 467
of following conditions hold: 468
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 476
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 480
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 481
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 482
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 483
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 484
SuperHyperPath . 485
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 486
(Ref. [185],Definition 5.3,p.7). 487
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). A

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
have 488
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 489
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 490
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 491
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 492
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 493
(NSHE)). (Ref. [185],Definition 5.4,p.7). 494
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 495
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 496
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 497
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 498
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 499
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 500
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 501
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 503
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 504
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 506
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 507
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 508
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 509
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 510
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor). 511
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 513
either V 0 or E 0 is called 514
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 515
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 516
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 517
called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 518
∀N (Ea ) ∈ C : C is
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 519
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 520
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 521
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if the following expression is 522
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor criteria holds 523
∀N (Va ) ∈ C : C is
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 524
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 525
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 528
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor). 529
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 532
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 535
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 536
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 537
SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 538
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 539
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 540
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 541
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 544
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 545
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 546
Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 547
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 549
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 550
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 551
re-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 552
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 553
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 554
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 555
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 556
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive Extreme 557
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 559
its Extreme coefficient; 560
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 561
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic 562
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for a 564
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 565
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 566
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 567
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 568
Neutrosophic coefficient; 572
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of Neutrosophic 573
rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 576
SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 579
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 581
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if it’s either of 582
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 586
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 587
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive Neutrosophic 588
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 589
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 590
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 591
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 594
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 597
Extreme SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; and the Extreme power is corresponded to 600
its Extreme coefficient; 601
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor SuperHyperPolynomial if 602
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 609
Neutrosophic coefficient. 613
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor). 614
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 615
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 616
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor such that either of the following expressions hold for 617
the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 618
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ.
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the 619
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 620
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is a Neutrosophic kind of 621
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor such that either of the following 622
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 623
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 624
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ.
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. 625
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 626
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 627
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, there’s a need to 628
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 629
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 630
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 631
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 632
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 633
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 634
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 635
understandable. 636

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

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

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

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

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

P P
717
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 718
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between conseNeighborive SuperHyperPoints 719
on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 720
n−1
X
e(H) = ini = 2k − n1 − 2n2 ≥ 2k − 2n.
i=3
Some SuperHyperPairs of SuperHyperVertices of H might be joined by some parallel 721
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 722
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 723
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 724
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 725
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 726
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 727
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 728
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let X be a 729
nonnegative Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 730
E(X)
P (X ≥ t) ≤ .
t
Proof.
X X
E(X) = {X(a)P (a) : a ∈ V } ≥ {X(a)P (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t}
X X
{tP (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t} = t {P (a) : a ∈ V, X(a) ≥ t}
tP (X ≥ t).
Dividing the first and last members by t yields the asserted inequality. 731
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 732
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Let Xn be a 733
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 734
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 735
Proof. 736
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. A special 738
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 739
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. A special SuperHyperGraph in 741
Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 742
SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 743
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 744
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 745
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 746
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 747
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 748
E(XS ) = P (XS = 1) = P (AS ) = (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 .
Let X be the number of stable SuperHyperSets of cardinality k + 1 in G. Then 749
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 750
X
E(X) = {E(XS ) : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1} = (n choose k+1)(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 .
We bound the right-hand side by invoking two elementary inequalities: 751
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 752
nk+1 e−p)(k+1)choose2 ne−pk/2k+1

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

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

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 835

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

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




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

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


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

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




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

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


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
868

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

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

(16.3)

(16.3)
872

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

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
880

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

(16.3)

(16.3)

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

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

(16.3)

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

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

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
904

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

(16.3)
908

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
912

(16.3)

(16.3)

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
916
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 917
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 918
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 919
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 920
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 921
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 922
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 923
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 924
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 925
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor minus all Neutrosophic 926
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 927
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 928
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, minus all 929
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 930
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic

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

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor has, the least
Neutrosophic cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic
cardinality, is the Neutrosophic cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s a Neutrosophic type-result-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor with the least Neutrosophic 940
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 941
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 942
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 943
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Eulerian−Cycle−N eighbor

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

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

The SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {z} isn’t a
quasi-R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor since neither amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges nor
amount of SuperHyperVertices where amount refers to the Neutrosophic number of
SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges) more than one to form any kind of
SuperHyperEdges or any number of SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices has the

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

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

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

connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and
their quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Eulerian-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 947
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 948
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 949
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 950
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 951
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 952
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 953
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 954
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor decorates the

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Neutrosophic connections so
as this Neutrosophic style implies different versions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges
with the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality in the terms of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The lower Neutrosophic bound is to have the
maximum Neutrosophic groups of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have perfect
Neutrosophic connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges and the outside of this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the connectedness of the

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

Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel proposes a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet has only some amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from one
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge such that there’s no Neutrosophic amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges more than one involving these some amount of these
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The Neutrosophic cardinality of this Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet is the maximum and the Neutrosophic case is occurred in the minimum
Neutrosophic situation. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
Has the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such that
Contains some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

1046

1047

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

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


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

1071

1072

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1208
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1209
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1210
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1211
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 1212
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. The 1213
latter is straightforward. 1214
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1215
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1216
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1217
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1218
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.5)
Then 1219

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1220
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1221
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1222
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1223

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1227
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1228
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1229
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1231
Then 1232

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1233
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1234
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1235
There’s a new way to redefine as 1236

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1240
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1241
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1242
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1243
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic 1244
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1246
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1247

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1248
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
1249
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1250
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1251

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1254
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1255
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1256
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1257
the 1258
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1259
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1260
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1261
solution 1262
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1263
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1264
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1265
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1266
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1267
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1268
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1269
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1270
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1271

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1272
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1273
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 1275

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1278
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1279
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1280
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1281
the 1282
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1283
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1284
solution 1286
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1288
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1289
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1290
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1291
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1292
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1293
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1294
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1295
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 1296

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1297
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1298
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1300

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

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in the Neutrosophic
Example (16.15)
latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Thus 1303
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1304
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor could be applied. The unique embedded 1305
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor proposes some longest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 1306
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1307
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1309
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1310
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1311
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1312
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1314
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1315
For the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, and 1316
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, some general results are introduced. 1317
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1318
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1319
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1320
N eutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian − Cycle − N eighbor =

{theSuperHyperEulerian − Cycle − N eighborof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEulerian − Cycle − N eighbor
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEulerian−Cycle−N eighbor. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1321
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1322
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1323
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1324
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and 1325
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor coincide. 1326
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1328
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1329
of the alphabet. Then a conseNeighborive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1331
strongest SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor if and only if it’s a longest 1332
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1334
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1335
its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and reversely. 1336
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, 1337
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1338
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic 1339
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and reversely. 1340
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1341
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 1342
isn’t well-defined. 1343
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1344
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1345
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1346
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1348
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1349
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor isn’t well-defined. 1350
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1351
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is 1352
well-defined. 1353
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1354
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1355
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined. 1356
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1358
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined if and only if its 1359
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor is well-defined. 1360
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1361
is 1362
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1363
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1364
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1365
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1366
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1367
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1368
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1369
∅ is 1370
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1371
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1372
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1373
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1374
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1375
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1376
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1377
independent SuperHyperSet is 1378
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1379
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1380
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1381
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1382
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1383
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1384
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1385
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1386
maximal 1387
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1388
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1389
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1390
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1391
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1392
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1393
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1394
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1395
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1396
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1397
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1398
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1399
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1400
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1401
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1402
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1403
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1405
number of 1406
(i) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1407
(ii) : the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1408
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1409
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1410
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1411
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1412
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1413
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1414
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1416
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1417
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1418
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1419
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1420
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1421
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1422
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1423
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1426
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1427
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1428
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1429
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1433
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1434
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1435
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1438
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1439
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1440
is a 1441
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1445
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1446
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1447
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1450
number of 1451
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1455
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1456
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1457
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1458
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1459
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1460
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1462
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1463
(iv) : SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1467
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1468
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1469
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1470
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1471
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1472
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1473
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1474
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1478
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1480
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1482
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1483
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1487
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1488
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1489
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1491
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1493
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1494
of a dual 1495
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1499
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1500
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1501
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1503
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1504
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1505
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. 1511
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1512
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1513
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1514
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1515
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1516
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1517
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S 1518
such that 1519
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1520
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1521
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1522
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then 1523
(i) S is SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor set; 1524
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1525
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1526
Then 1527
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1528
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1529
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1530
which is connected. Then 1531
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1532
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1533
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1534
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1535
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1537
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1538
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1539
a dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1540
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1541
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1542
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1544
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1545
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1546
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1547
dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1548
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1549
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1550
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1552
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1553
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1554
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1555
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then 1557
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1558
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1560
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1561
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1562
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1564
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1565
(ii) Γ = 1; 1566
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1567
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1568
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1569
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1570
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1571
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1572
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1573
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1574
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1575
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1576
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1577
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1579
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1580
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1581
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1583
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1584
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1586
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 1587
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1588
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1590
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1591
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1592
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF; 1593
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1594
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1595
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1596
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1597
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1598
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1599
SuperHyperSet. Then 1600
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1601
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF; 1602
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1603

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1604
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1605
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E). 1606
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1607
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1608
SuperHyperSet. Then 1609
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1610
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor for N SHF : (V, E); 1611
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1612

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1613
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 1614
for N SHF : (V, E). 1615
Then following statements hold; 1617
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1618
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is an 1619
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1620
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1621
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1622
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1623
Then following statements hold; 1625
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1626
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is an 1627
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1628
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1629
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, then S is a dual 1630
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1631
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1632
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1633
statements hold; 1634
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1635
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1636
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1637
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1639
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1641
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1642
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1643
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1644
statements hold; 1645
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1646
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1648
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1650
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1652
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1653
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1655
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1656
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1657
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1659
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1661
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1664
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1666
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1667
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1668
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1670
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1672
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor; 1673
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1675
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1677
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1678
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1679
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1681
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1683
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1686
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1688
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. Then following statements hold; 1689
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1690
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1692
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1694
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1697
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1698
Neutrosophic Recognition 1699
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1700
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1701
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1702
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1703
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1704
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1705
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1706
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1707
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1708
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1709
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1710
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1711
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1712
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1713
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1714
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1715
happened and what’s done. 1716
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1717
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1718
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1719
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1720
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, SuperHyperStar, 1721
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1722
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor or the Neutrosophic 1723
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic 1724
SuperHyperModels. 1725
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1726
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1727
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1728
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1729
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1730
featured. 1731
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1732
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1733
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1734
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1735
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1736
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

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

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

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1738
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1739
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1740
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1741
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1742
Neutrosophic featured. 1743
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1744
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1745
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1746
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1747
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1748
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1750
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1751
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1752
The SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic 1753
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s 1754
Recognitions”. 1755
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1756
recognitions? 1757
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to 1758
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor? 1759
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1760
compute them? 1761
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1762
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor? 1763
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic 1764
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1765
they’re based on SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, are there else? 1766
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1767
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1768
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1769
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1770
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1771
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1772
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1773
highlighted. 1774
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1775
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1776
SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition 1777
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. 1778
Based on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new 1779
SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, finds the convenient 1780
background to implement some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and 1781
some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of 1782
the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s 1783
mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the 1784
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor, the new SuperHyperClasses and 1785
SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on 1786
the SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor. 1787
The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. 1788
In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1789
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 1790
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1791
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1792
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1793
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1794
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1795
formally called “ SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1796
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1797
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this 1798
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1799
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperEulerian-Cycle-Neighbor 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1800
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1801
Forms 1802
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1803
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1807
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1808
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1809
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1810
|Ei |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1811
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1812
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1813
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1814
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1815
|Vi |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPIC CARDINALITY ; 1816
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1817
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1818
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1819
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1820
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1823
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1825
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1826
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1827
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1828
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1830
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1831
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1834
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1835
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1838
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1839
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1840
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1841
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1842
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 1843
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1844
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1845
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 1846
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1847
Extreme coefficient; 1848
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1849
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1850
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1852
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1853
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1854
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1858
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1860
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 1865
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1867
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1868
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1875
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1876
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1881
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality conseNeighborive 1882
the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1884
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1886
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1892
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1895
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1900
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1901
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1902
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1903
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1904
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1905
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1906
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1907
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 1910
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1911
SuperHyperDuality. 1916

straightforward. 1919

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(2 × 1 × 2) + (2 × 4 × 5)z.

(1 × 1 × 2)z.

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

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



C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1979
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1980
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1981
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1985
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1989
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1990
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1991
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality =

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

.
Proof. Let 1992
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2003
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2004
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2014
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality

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

X X
= =( (|Pi ESHG:(V,E) |choose 2) = z 2 .
EXT ERN AL |
|VESHG:(V,E) i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 2017
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 2022
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2023
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2024
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2025
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2026
solution 2029
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2036

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2039
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2040

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2046
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2051
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2059
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
|z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2062
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Neutrosophic Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2063
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2064

∃!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 2069
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2070
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2077
Forms 2079
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2080
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2084
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2085
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2086
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2087
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2089
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2090
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2091
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2092
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2094
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2095
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2096
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2097
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2100
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2101
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2102
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2107
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2108
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2110
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2115
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2116
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2117
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2118
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2119
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2124
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2126
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2135
coefficient; 2136
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2137
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2140
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2141
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2144
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2145
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2152
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2153
the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2161
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2163
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2172
coefficient. 2173
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2177
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2178
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2179
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2180
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2181
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2182
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 2183
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 2184
SuperHyperJoin. 2185
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

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

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

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


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

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

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

.
Proof. Let 2259
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2263
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2267

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

.
Proof. Let 2270
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2281
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2282

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2292
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperJoin

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2295
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 2300
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2301
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2302
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2304
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2305
solution 2307
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2314

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2317
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2318

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2322
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2323
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2324
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2329
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2337

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

.
Proof. Let 2340
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2341

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2345
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2346
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2347
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2348
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2355
Forms 2357
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2358
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2362
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2363
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2364
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2365
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2367
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2368
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2369
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2370
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2372
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2373
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2374
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2375
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2378
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2380
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2383
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2385
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2386
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2393
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2394
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2395
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2396
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2402
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2404
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2405
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2413
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2415
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2420
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2422
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2423
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2430
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2431
the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2439
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2441
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2447
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2450
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2455
SuperHyperPerfect. 2463
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

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

3 × 3z 2 .



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

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

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

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



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

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

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2537
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2541
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2545
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect =

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

.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2548
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2559
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2560

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2570
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2573
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 2578
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2579
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2580
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2581
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2582
solution 2585
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2592

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2595
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2596

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2600
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2601
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2602
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2607
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2615
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2618

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2619

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2623
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2624
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2625
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2626
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2633
Forms 2635
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2636
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2640
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2641
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2642
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2643
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2645
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2646
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2647
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2648
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2650
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2651
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2652
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2653
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2656
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2658
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2663
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2664
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2666
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2671
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2672
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2673
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2680
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2682
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2691
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2693
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2700
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2701
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2708
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2709
the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2717
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2719
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2728
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2733
SuperHyperTotal. 2741
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




4 × 3z 3 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2815
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2819
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2823
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2826
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1

Then 2837
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2838
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2848
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2851
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2856
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2857
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2860
solution 2863
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2870

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2873
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2874

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2878
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2879
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2885
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2893
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Neutrosophic Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2896
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2897

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2901
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2902
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2903
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2904
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2911
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2912
Forms 2913
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2914
SuperHyperConnected). 2915
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2919
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2920
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2921
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2922
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2923
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2924
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2926
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2927
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2928
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2929
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2930
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2931
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2933
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2934
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2935
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2936
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2939
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2941
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2942
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2943
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2944
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2946
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2947
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2950
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2951
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2954
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2955
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2956
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2957
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2958
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2959
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2960
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2961
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2963
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2964
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2965
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2966
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2967
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2968
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2969
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2970
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2971
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality conseNeighborive 2972
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2973
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2974
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2975
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2976
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2979
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2980
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the conseNeighborive Extreme sequence of 2981
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2983
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2984
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2987
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2988
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2991
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2992
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2995
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2998
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 3001
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3003
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3006
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 3007
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 3008
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3009
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3012
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3013
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3017
SuperHyperConnected. 3025
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 3099
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 3103
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3107
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Neutrosophic Cardinality
Proof. Let 3110
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality −1 .

Then 3121
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3122
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3132
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3135
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3140
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3141
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3144
solution 3147
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3154
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3157
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3162
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3163
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3169
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3177
∗
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 3180
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3182

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3185
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3186
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3187
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3188
17 Background 3196
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3197
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3198
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3199
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3200
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett 3201
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3202
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3203
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3204
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3205
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3206
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3207
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3208
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3209
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3210
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3211
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3212
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3213
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3214
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3215
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3216
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3217
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3218
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3219
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3220
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3221
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3222
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3223
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3224
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3225
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3226
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3227
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3228
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3229
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3230
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3231
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3232
SuperHyperNumbers. 3233
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3234
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3235
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research 3236
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3237
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3238
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3239
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3240
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 2 and issue 1 with pages 3241
16-24. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3242
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3243
results based on initial background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing 3244
Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside 3245
(Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 3246
(2022), “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by 3247
Henry Garrett (2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3248
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3249
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty 3250
On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward 3251
Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled 3252
Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of 3253
Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” 3254
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The 3255
Cells and Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3256
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) 3257
SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3258
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and 3259
Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed 3260
SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3261
in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the 3262
Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes 3263
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism 3264
of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition 3265
Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3266
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3267
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 3268
Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on 3269
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry 3270
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction 3271
To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And 3272
Beyond ” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on 3273
Cancer’s Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” 3274
in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3275
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3276
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3277
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3278
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3279
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3280
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3281
in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3282
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3283
Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3284
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3285
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3286
And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3287
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3288
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3289
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3290
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3291
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3292
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3293
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3294
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3295
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [155] by Henry 3296
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3297
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3298
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [156] by Henry Garrett 3299
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3300
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3301
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [157] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3302
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3303
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3304
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [158] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3305
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3306
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [161] by 3307
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3308
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3309
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [162] by Henry 3310
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3311
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3312
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [165] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3313
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3314
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [168] by Henry 3315
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3316
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3317
in Ref. [169] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3318
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3319
Ref. [170] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3320
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3321
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [171] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3322
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3323
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [172] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3324
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3325
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [173] by Henry Garrett 3326
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3327
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [184] by Henry 3328
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3329
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3330
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [185] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–185], there 3331
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3332
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3333
at [186–292]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3334
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [293, 294]. 3335
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3336
proposed as book in Ref. [281] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3337
Scholar and has more than 4331 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3338
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3339
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3340
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3341
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3342
proposed as book in Ref. [282] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3343
Scholar and has more than 5327 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3344
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3345
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3346
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3347
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3348
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3349
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3350
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3351
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3352
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–185] 3353
alongside scientific research books at [186–292]. Two popular scientific research books 3354
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4331 and 5327 respectively, on neutrosophic 3355
science is on [293, 294]. 3356
References 3357
1. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3358
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3359
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3360
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3361
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3362
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3363
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3364
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3365
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3366
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3367
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3368
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3369
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3370
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3371
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3372
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3373
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3374
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3375
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. 3376
(https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/neutrosophic-codegree- 3377
and-neutrosophic-degree-alongside-chromatic-numbers-in-the-setting-of-some- 3378
classes-related-to-neut.pdf) 3379
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3380
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3381
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3382
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3383
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3384
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3385
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3386
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3387
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3388
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3389
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3390
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3391
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3393
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3394
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3395
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3396
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3397
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3398
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3399
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3400
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3401
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3402
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3403
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3404
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3405
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3406
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3407
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3408
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3409
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3410
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3411
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3412
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3413
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3414
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3415
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3416
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3417
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3418
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3419
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3420
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3421
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3422
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3423
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3424
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3425
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3426
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3427
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3428
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3429
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3430
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3431
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3432
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3433
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3434
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3436
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3440
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3441
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3442
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3443
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3444
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3445
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3446
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3447
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3448
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3449
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3450
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3451
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3452
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3453
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3454
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3455
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3456
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3457
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3458
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3459
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3460
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3461
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7853867). 3462
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3463
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3464
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7853922). 3465
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3467
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7851519). 3468
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3469
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3470
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3473
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3474
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3475
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3476
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3479
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3480
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3482
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3485
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3488
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3491
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7819531). 3492
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3494
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3497
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3498
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3500
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3501
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3503
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3504
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3506
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3509
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3512
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3513
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3515
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3518
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3519
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3520
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3522
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3523
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3525
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3526
47. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3527
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3528
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3531
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3534
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3535
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3537
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3538
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3540
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3543
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3546
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3549
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787066). 3550
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3552
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3555
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3558
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3561
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3564
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3566
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3567
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3568
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3570
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3573
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3574
63. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3575
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3576
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3577
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3579
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3582
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3585
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3586
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3588
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3589
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3591
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3592
69. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3593
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3594
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3595
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3597
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3600
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3603
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3604
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3606
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3609
75. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3611
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3613
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3615
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3617
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3618
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3621
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3623
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3624
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3627
81. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3629
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3631
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3633
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3635
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3636
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3639
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3640
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3642
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3645
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3647
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3649
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3651
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3652
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3654
90. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3656
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3658
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3660
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3661
92. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3662
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3663
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3664
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3666
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3667
94. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3668
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3669
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3672
96. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3674
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3675
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3678
98. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3680
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3681
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3684
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3686
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3688
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3690
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3691
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3692
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3693
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3696
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3697
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3698
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3699
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3702
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3703
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3704
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3705
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3708
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3709
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3710
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3711
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3714
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3715
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3716
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3717
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3720
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3721
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3722
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3723
113. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3725
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3726
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3729
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3730
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3731
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3732
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3735
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3736
117. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3737
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3738
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3741
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3743
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3744
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3747
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3749
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3750
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3752
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3753
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3756
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3759
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3761
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3762
126. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3764
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3765
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3767
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3768
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3769
128. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3770
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3771
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3772
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3773
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3774
130. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3776
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3777
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3778
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3779
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3780
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3781
132. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3782
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3783
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3784
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3785
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3788
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3789
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3792
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3793
135. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3794
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3796
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3797
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3800
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3801
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3804
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3805
138. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3806
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3807
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3808
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3809
139. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3810
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3811
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3812
140. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3813
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3814
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3815
141. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3816
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3817
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3818
142. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3819
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3820
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3821
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3822
143. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3823
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3824
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3825
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3826
144. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3827
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3828
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3829
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3830
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3831
145. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3832
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3833
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3834
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3835
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3836
146. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3837
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3838
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3839
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3840
147. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3841
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3842
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3843
148. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3844
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3847
149. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3848
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3849
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3850
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3851
150. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3852
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3853
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3854
151. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3855
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3856
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3857
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3858
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3859
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3860
152. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3861
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3862
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3863
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3864
153. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3865
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3866
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3867
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3868
154. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3869
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3870
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3871
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3872
155. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3873
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3874
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3875
156. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3876
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3877
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3878
157. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3880
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3881
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3882
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3883
158. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3884
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3885
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3886
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3887
159. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3888
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3889
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3890
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3891
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3893
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3894
161. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3895
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3896
162. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3898
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3899
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3900
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3905
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3909
165. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3910
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3911
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3912
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3913
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3916
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3918
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3919
168. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3920
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3921
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3924
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3925
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3927
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3928
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3931
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3932
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3934
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3935
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3938
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3939
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3941
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3942
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3944
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3949
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3950
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3954
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3955
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3958
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3961
180. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3962
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3963
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3964
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3965
181. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3966
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3967
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3968
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3969
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3972
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3973
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3976
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3977
184. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3978
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3979
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3980
185. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3981
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3982
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3983
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3984
186. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3985
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7856329). 3986
187. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3987
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 3988
188. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3989
189. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3991
190. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3993
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7835063). 3994
191. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3995
192. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3997
193. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3999
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4000
194. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4001
195. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4003
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 4004
196. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4005
197. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4007
198. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4009
199. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4011
200. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4013
201. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4015
202. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4017
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4018
203. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4019
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4020
204. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4021
205. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4023
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4024
206. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4025
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4026
207. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4027
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4028
208. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4029
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4030
209. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4031
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4032
210. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4033
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4034
211. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4035
212. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4037
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4038
213. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4039
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4040
214. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4041
215. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4043
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4044
216. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4045
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4046
217. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4047
218. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4049
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4050
219. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4051
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4052
220. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4053
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4054
221. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4055
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4056
222. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4057
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4058
223. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4059
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4060
224. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4061
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4062
225. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4063
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4064
226. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4065
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4066
227. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4067
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4068
228. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4069
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4070
229. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4071
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4072
230. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4073
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4074
231. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4075
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4076
232. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4077
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4078
233. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4079
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4080
234. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4081
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4082
235. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4083
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4084
236. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4085
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4086
237. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4087
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4088
238. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4089
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4090
239. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4091
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4092
240. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4093
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4094
241. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4095
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4096
242. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4097
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4098
243. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4099
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4100
244. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4101
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4102
245. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4103
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4104
246. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4105
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4106
247. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4107
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4108
248. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4109
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4110
249. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4111
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4112
250. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4113
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4114
251. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4115
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4116
252. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4117
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4118
253. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4119
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4120
254. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4121
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4122
255. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4123
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4124
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4125
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4126
257. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4127
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4128
258. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4129
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4130
259. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4131
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4132
260. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4133
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4134
261. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4135
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4136
262. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4137
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4138
263. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4139
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4140
264. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4141
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4142
265. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4143
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4144
266. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4145
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4146
267. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4147
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4148
268. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4149
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4150
269. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4151
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4152
270. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4153
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4154
271. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4155
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4156
272. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4157
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4158
273. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4159
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4160
274. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4161
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4162
275. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4163
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4164
276. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4165
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4166
277. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4167
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4168
278. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4169
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4170
279. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4171
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4172
280. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4173
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4174
281. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4175
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4176
282. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4177
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4178
283. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4179
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4180
284. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4181
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4182
285. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4183
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4184
286. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4185
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4186
287. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4187
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4188
288. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4189
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4190
289. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4191
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4192
290. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4193
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4194
291. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4195
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4196
292. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4197
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4198
293. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4199
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4200
294. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4201
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4202
View publication stats

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

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · April 2023

460 PUBLICATIONS 14,316 CITATIONS

Metric Dimension in fuzzy(neutrosophic) Graphs View project

Number Graphs And Numbers View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper 3

Nebbish On Super Nebulous 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperEulerian-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