New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/370631848
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab
Preprint · May 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
473 PUBLICATIONS 16,425 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
On Combinatorics View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 09 May 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 Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super 3
Gab 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
SuperHyperEdge-Gap). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a Edge-Gap 10
pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 11
E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap 12
if the following expression is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 13
Ea makes connectivity components;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 14
e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 15
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 16
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 17
v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 18
Va makes connectivity components;
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 19
v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 20
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 21
SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 22
re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic 23
rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEdge-Gap). Assume a Neutrosophic 24
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 25
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 26
SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 27
rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 29
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 30
of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive 31
Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 32
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap if 33
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 34
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and 35
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 36
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 37
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 38
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 39
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; an Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap 40
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 41
rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 43
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 44
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 45
Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 46
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 47
form the Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 48
Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 49
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 50
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 52
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 53
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 54
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 55
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 56
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the Neutrosophic power is 57
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s 58
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 59
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 61
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 62
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 63
and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 64
a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 65
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and 66
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 67
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 68
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 69
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 70
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; an 71
Extreme V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 72
e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 73
v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for an 74
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 75
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 76
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet 77
S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 78
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the 79
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 80
SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 81
v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for a 83
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 84
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 86
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 87
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 88
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the 89
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific 90
research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 91
SuperHyperEdge-Gap and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Two different types of 92
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 93
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 94
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 95
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 96
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 97
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 98
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 99
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 100
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 101
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 102
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 103
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 104
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 105
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 106
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 107
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 108
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 109
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 110
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 111
δ−SuperHyperEdge-Gap is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 112
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 113
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 114
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 115
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 116
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEdge-Gap is a maximal 117
Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such 118
that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 119
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 120
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 121
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 122
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 123
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 124
version of a SuperHyperEdge-Gap . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 125
SuperHyperEdge-Gap more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 126
SuperHyperEdge-Gap, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperEdge-Gap ”. 127
The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 128
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 129
assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperEdge-Gap . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 130
SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, 131
SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic 132
SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 133
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of 134
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The 135
Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 136
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 137
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 138
based on a SuperHyperEdge-Gap . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the 139
foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to 140
have all SuperHyperEdge-Gap until the SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then it’s officially called a 141
“SuperHyperEdge-Gap” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperEdge-Gap . There are some 142
instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperEdge-Gap ”. 143
These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 144
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperEdge-Gap . For the 145
sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, there’s a need to “redefine” the 146
notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap” and a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap 147
”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from 148
the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels 149
to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 150
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperEdge-Gap 151
are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap” if the intended Table holds. It’s 152
useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways 153
to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap more 154
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 155
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 156
SuperHyperEdge-Gap, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, 157
and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 158
SuperHyperEdge-Gap”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic 159
SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic 160
SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a 161
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap” where it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic 162
value from all the SuperHyperEdge-Gap amid the maximum value amid all 163
SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperEdge-Gap .] SuperHyperEdge-Gap . A graph is a 164
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 165
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 166
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 167
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 168
SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 169
SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 170
all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 171
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, 172
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one 173
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 174
forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 175
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 176
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 177
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 178
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 179
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 180
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 181
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 182
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 183
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 184
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 185
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 186
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 187
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 188
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 189
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 190
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 191
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 192
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 193
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 194
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 195
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 196
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 197
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 198
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperEdge-Gap or the strongest 199
SuperHyperEdge-Gap in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 200
SuperHyperEdge-Gap, called SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and the strongest SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 201
called Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, some general results are introduced. Beyond 202
that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two SuperHyperEdges 203
but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form 204
any style of a SuperHyperEdge-Gap. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperEdge-Gap 205
but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperEdge-Gap. It, literarily, deforms and 206
it doesn’t form. A basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap theory, 207
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 208
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Cancer’s 209
Neutrosophic Recognition 210
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 211
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 212
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 213
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 214
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 215
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 216
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 217
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 218
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 219
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 220
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 221
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 222
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 223
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 224
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 225
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 226
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 227
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 228
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 229
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 230
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 231
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 232
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 233
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 234
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 235
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 236
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 237
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 238
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 239
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 240
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 241
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 242
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 243
formally called “ SuperHyperEdge-Gap” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 244
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 245
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 246
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 247
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 248
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 249
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 250
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 251
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 252
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 253
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 254
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 255
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperEdge-Gap, SuperHyperStar, 256
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 257
either the optimal SuperHyperEdge-Gap or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in those 258
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 259
SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two 260
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 261
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperEdge-Gap. There isn’t any formation 262
of any SuperHyperEdge-Gap but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 263
It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 264
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 265
find the “ amount of SuperHyperEdge-Gap” of either individual of cells or the groups of 266
cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 267
SuperHyperEdge-Gap” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of cells? 268
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 269
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 270
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 271
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 272
SuperHyperEdge-Gap” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap” on “SuperHyperGraph” 273
and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken more motivations 274
to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this SuperHyperNotion 275
with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some instances and examples to 276
make clarifications about the framework of this research. The general results and some 277
results about some connections are some avenues to make key point of this research, 278
“Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 279
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 280
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 281
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 282
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 283
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 284
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 285
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperEdge-Gap and 286
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperEdge-Gap” and 287
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in 288
Edge-Gap to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform 289
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, 290
corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, 291
titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 292
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 293
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 294
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 295
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 296
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 297
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 298
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 299
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 300
SuperHyperEdge-Gap”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap”, “Results on 301
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are 302
curious questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about 303
excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description 304
and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperEdge-Gap”. The 305
keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” 306
with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite 307
as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 308
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 309
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 310
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 311
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 312
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 313
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 314
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 315
Research On the Redeemed Ways 316
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 317
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [195],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 318
Set](Ref. [195],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 319
(NSHG)](Ref. [195],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 320
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [195],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [195], 321
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 322
(NSHG)](Ref. [195],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 323
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [195],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 324
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [195],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 325
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [195]. 326
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 327
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 328
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [195],Definition 2.1,p.1). 329
Let X be a Edge-Gap 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 330
+
]− 0, 1 [. 331
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [195],Definition 2.2,p.2). 332
Let X be a Edge-Gap 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. [195],Definition 333
2.5,p.2). 334
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 335
pair S = (V, E), where 336
0
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V ; 337
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 338
1, 2, . . . , n); 339
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 340
V; 341
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 342
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 343
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 344
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 345
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 346
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 347
(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 . 348
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 349
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 350
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 351
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 352
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 353
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 354
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 355
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 356
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 357
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 358
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 359
(Ref. [195],Definition 2.7,p.3). 360
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 361
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 362
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 363
characterized as follow-up items. 364
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 365
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 366
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 367
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 368
HyperEdge; 369
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 370
SuperEdge; 371
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 372
SuperHyperEdge. 373
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 374
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 375
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [195], Definition 2.7, p.3). 376
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 377
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 378
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 379
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 380
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 381
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 382
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)). 383
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 384
pair S = (V, E), where 385
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 386
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 387
1, 2, . . . , n); 388
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 389
V; 390
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 391
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 392
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 393
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 394
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 395
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 396
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 397
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 398
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 399
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 400
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 401
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 402
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 403
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 404
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 405
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 406
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 407
(Ref. [195],Definition 2.7,p.3). 408
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 409
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 410
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 411
characterized as follow-up items. 412
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 413
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 414
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 415
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 416
HyperEdge; 417
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 418
SuperEdge; 419
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 420
SuperHyperEdge. 421
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 422
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 423
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 424
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 425
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 426
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 427
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 428
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 429
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 430
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 431
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 432
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 433
given SuperHyperEdges; 434
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 435
SuperHyperEdges; 436
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 437
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 438
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 439
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 440
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 441
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 442
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 443
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 444
common SuperVertex. 445
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 446
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 447
of following conditions hold: 448
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 449
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 450
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 451
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 452
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 453
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 454
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 455
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 456
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 457
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 458
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 459
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. 460
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 461
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 462
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 463
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 464
SuperHyperPath . 465
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 466
(Ref. [195],Definition 5.3,p.7). 467
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 468
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 469
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 470
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 471
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 472
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 473
(NSHE)). (Ref. [195],Definition 5.4,p.7). 474
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 475
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 476
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 477
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 478
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 479
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 480
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 481
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 483
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 484
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 486
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 487
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 488
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 489
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap). 490
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 492
either V 0 or E 0 is called 493
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called 494
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 495
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called 496
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 497
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 498
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called 499
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 500
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called 501
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 502
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 503
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic 504
v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 506
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEdge-Gap). 507
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic 510
v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for 512
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 513
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 514
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 515
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 516
Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 517
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic 518
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 521
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 522
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 525
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 526
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 527
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 529
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 530
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 531
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 532
Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 534
Extreme coefficient; 535
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 536
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 537
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 539
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 540
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 541
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 542
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 543
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 544
SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 545
Neutrosophic coefficient; 546
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic 547
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 552
Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 554
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic 555
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 559
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 562
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 563
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 564
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 568
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 569
Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 571
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 573
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 574
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 579
SuperHyperEdge-Gap; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 582
Neutrosophic coefficient. 583
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperEdge-Gap). 584
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 585
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
(i) an δ−SuperHyperEdge-Gap is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 586
SuperHyperEdge-Gap such that either of the following expressions hold for the 587
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 588
|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 589
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 590
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperEdge-Gap is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 591
SuperHyperEdge-Gap such that either of the following Neutrosophic expressions hold 592
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 593
|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. 594
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 595
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 596
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, there’s a need to 597
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 598
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 599
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 600
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 601
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 602
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 603
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 604
understandable. 605
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 606
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 607
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperEdge-Gap, SuperHyperStar, 608
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 609
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 610
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 611
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 612
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 613
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 614
Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap 615
more Neutrosophicly understandable. 616

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, there’s a need to 617
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap”. The 618
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 619
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 620
assign to the values. 621
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperEdge-Gap. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 622
SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the Table (3) holds. 623
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As The Edge-Gap 624
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 625
Forms 626
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 627
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is called 629
Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is called 630
Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic probability 631
of A. 632
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 633
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 635
Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 636
s-independent criteria 637
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 638
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 639
criteria 640
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)

Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 641
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Any k-function Edge-Gap like E is called 643
Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Edge-Gap like E is called 644
Neutrosophic Variable. 645
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 646
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 647
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is called 649
Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 650
Expectation criteria 651
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 652
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. A Neutrosophic number is called Neutrosophic 654
Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic Crossing criteria 655
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.

Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 656
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let m and n propose special 657
Edge-Gap. Then with m ≥ 4n, 658
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 659
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 660
Neutrosophic independently with probability Edge-Gap p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] and 661
H := G[S]. 662
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: 663
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
664
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 665
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 666
points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperLines

√ in the 667
plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then 668
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 669
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 670
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points 671
on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 672
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 673
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 674
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 675
again l < 32n2 /k 3 . 676
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 678
points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 679
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 680
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 681
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Draw a SuperHyperUnit SuperHyperCircle 682
around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic P number of these 683
SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then i = 0n−1 ni = n and 684

1
P n−1
k=2 i=0 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph H with 685
SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs 686
between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at 687
least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 688
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 689
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 690
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 691
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 692
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 693
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 694
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 695
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 696
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let X be a nonnegative 697
Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 698
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. 699
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 700
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let Xn be a nonnegative 701
integer-valued variable in a probability Edge-Gap (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 as 702
n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 703
Proof. 704
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. A special SuperHyperGraph in 706
Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 707
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is up. 709
Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of G, 710
where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 711
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 712
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 713
G. 714
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 715
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 716
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 717
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 718
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: 719
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 720
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 721
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 722
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 723
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 724
stability number at most k. 725
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 726
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is called 728
Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 729
Variance criteria 730
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let X be a Neutrosophic 732
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 733
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let X be a Neutrosophic Variable and let 735
t be a positive real number. Then 736
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
737
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let Xn be a Neutrosophic 739
Variable in a probability Edge-Gap (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), 740
then 741
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 743
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 744
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 745
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, 747
set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for which f (k) is 748
less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 749
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 751
result is straightforward. 752
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let f and 754
k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 755
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 756
or 757
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 758
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. The latter is straightforward. 760
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 761
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let P be a monotone property of 763
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 764
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 765
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 766
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 767
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 768
S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 770
Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a copy of F as a 771
Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 772
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. Let F be a nonempty balanced 774
Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l SuperHyperEdges. 775
Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F as a Neutrosophic 776
SubSuperHyperGraph. 777
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Edge-Gap. The latter is straightforward. 779
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 780
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 781
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 782
SuperHyperEdge-Gap, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 783
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 784
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 785
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 786
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 787
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 788
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 789
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 790
SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 791
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Edge-Gap

= {E4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Edge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Edge-Gap
= {}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Edge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
792
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 795
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 796
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 797
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 798
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 799
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 800

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)


802
straightforward. 805

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
806

= {E1 }.
= z3.
= {V3 }.
= z2.
810


= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |{Ei ∈EN SHG }| .
= {V5 }.
= z7.
814

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
818




= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
822
• On the Figure (??), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 823

= {E4 }.
= z3.
= {}.
= 0z 0 .OntheF igure(9), theN eutrosophicSuperHyperN otion, namely, N eutrosoph


= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
826

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
830
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)

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

= {Ei62 }.
X |E 6 |
= z i2 .
= {Vi31 , Vi87 }.
X |V 3 ,V 8 |
= z i1 i7 .
838




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

= {E1 , E2 }.
= 2z 2 .
= {V1 }.
= z5.
846



= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |{Ei ∈EN SHG }| .
= {Vi ∈ VN SHG }.
X
= z |{Vi ∈VN SHG }| .
850

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |{Ei ∈EN SHG }| .
= {V1 , V2 }.
= 2z 5 .
854


= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |{Ei ∈EN SHG }| .
= {V2 , V23 }.
= 2z 5 .
858

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |{Ei ∈EN SHG }| .
= {V2 }.
= z5.
862




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

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {V1 }.
= z6.
870


= {E2 }.
= z 10 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
874

= {Ei ∈ (EN SHG \ {E1 })}.
X
= z |Ei ∈(EN SHG \{E1 })| .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .


878
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 879
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 880
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 881
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 882
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 883
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 884
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 885
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 886
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 887
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap minus all Neutrosophic 888
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 889
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 890
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap, minus all 891
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 892
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-Edge-Gap is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap is at 893
least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 894
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 895
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 896
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 897
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Edge-Gap in some cases but the maximum 898
number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Neutrosophic number of 899
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 900
contained in a Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. 901
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap with the least Neutrosophic cardinality, the 902
lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 903
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 904
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 905
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Edge−Gap

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Edge−GapSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Edge−Gap = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Edge−GapSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Edge-Gap. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower 906
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Edge-Gap is the cardinality of 907

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Edge−GapSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Edge−Gap = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Edge−GapSuperHyperP 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-Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp bound for the
cardinality, of a quasi-R-Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap. 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 908
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 909
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 910
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 911
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 912
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 913
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 914
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 915
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap.
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-Edge-Gap has the Neutrosophic cardinality of a
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap has the Neutrosophic
cardinality at least a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Assume a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet isn’t a Neutrosophic
R-Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap” 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-Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 916
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 917
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 918
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 919
free-quasi-triangle. 920
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-Edge-Gap. Those Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are
potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Edge-Gap. 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-Edge-Gap is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap 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
E
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. 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, 921
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
922
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap where E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is

fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic intended
SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Edge-Gap, 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-Edge-Gap is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap is 923
at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 924
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 925
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 926
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 927
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Edge-Gap in some cases but the 928
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 929
Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic 930
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. 931
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 932
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 933
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 934
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 935
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 936
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 937
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 938
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 939
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 940
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 941
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 942
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap where the 943
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 944
literarily, a Neutrosophic embedded R-Edge-Gap. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 945
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 946
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 947
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 948
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 949
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 950
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. The interior 951
types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the Neutrosophic 952
number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior Neutrosophic 953
SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more formal, the 954
perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any distinct 955
types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. Thus 956
Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Neutrosophic 957
SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the interior 958
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In the 959
embedded Neutrosophic Edge-Gap, there’s the usage of exterior Neutrosophic 960
SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the 961
title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One Neutrosophic 962
SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 963
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement has been ignored in 964
the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. The 965
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap with the exclusion of the exclusion of all Neutrosophic 966
SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the 967
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap with the inclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in 968
one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap. To sum them up, 969
in a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s 970
only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum 971
possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given 972
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of 973
them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Neutrosophic 974
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 975
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap, minus all Neutrosophic 976
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 977
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap has two titles. a Neutrosophic 978
quasi-R-Edge-Gap and its corresponded quasi-maximum Neutrosophic 979
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any 980
Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap with that quasi-maximum 981
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded Neutrosophic 982
SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, then the 983
Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the collection of all the 984
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gaps for all Neutrosophic numbers less than its Neutrosophic 985
corresponded maximum number. The essence of the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap ends up but 986
this essence starts up in the terms of the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap, again and more 987
in the operations of collecting all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gaps acted on the all 988
possible used formations of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one 989
Neutrosophic number. This Neutrosophic number is 990
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Edge-Gaps. Let 991
zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap be a 992
Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Edge-Gap. Then 993
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap is re-formalized 994
and redefined as follows. 995
GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 996
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap. 997
GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap =
{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 998
poses the upcoming expressions.

Edge-Gap 999
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1000
= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1001

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1002
GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1003
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1004

1005

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1006
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1007
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1008
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1009
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Edge-Gap” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of 1010
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Edge-Gap” since “Neutrosophic Quasi-Edge-Gap” happens “Neutrosophic 1011
Edge-Gap” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but 1012
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic Edge-Gap” in a 1013
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background 1014
since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise 1015
from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 1016
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Edge-Gap”, and “Neutrosophic Edge-Gap” are up. 1017
Thus, let 1018
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1019
GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1020
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Edge-Gap and the new terms are up. 1021
GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1022
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1023
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1024
And with go back to initial structure, 1025
GNeutrosophic Edge-Gap ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1026
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1027
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

1028

Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1029
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Edge-Gap if for any 1030
of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior 1031
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors 1032
with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to 1033
any amount of them. 1034
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1035
are coming up. 1036
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. The

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1037
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1038
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1039
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1040
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1041
Neutrosophic Edge-Gap 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 Edge-Gap is up. The
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap 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-Edge-Gap is
up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-Edge-Gap. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1042
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1043
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1044
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1045
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap and it’s an Neutrosophic Edge-Gap. 1046
Since it’s 1047
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 Edge-Gap. There isn’t
only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Edge-Gap, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1048
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1049
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1050
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1051
“Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap” 1052
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1053
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap, 1054
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-Edge-Gap amid those obvious
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1055
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp bound
for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1056
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1057
quasi-R-Edge-Gap if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1058
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1059
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1060
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1061
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1062
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1063
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1064
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1065
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1066
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1067
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap with the least cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound 1068
for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1069
ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1070
SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of the 1071
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to 1072
have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1073
R-Edge-Gap. Since it doesn’t have 1074
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1076
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1077
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1078
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1079
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic procedure such 1080
that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic 1081
SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1082
outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1083
ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its Neutrosophic 1084
SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the Neutrosophic 1085
SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. There’s only one 1086
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1087
VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the 1088
obvious Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap, VESHE is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic 1089
type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap, VESHE , is a Neutrosophic 1090
SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices does 1091
forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in 1092
a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic 1093
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1094
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1095
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1096
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1097
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1098
Neutrosophic R-Edge-Gap only contains all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and 1099
all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique Neutrosophic 1100
SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1101
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1102
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1103
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1104
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1105
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Edge-Gap, is up. There’s neither empty 1106
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1107
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1108
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap. The Neutrosophic 1109
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1110

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−Edge−GapSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Edge−Gap = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−Edge−GapSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic . The

Edge-Gap 1111
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1112
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1113

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Edge-Gap C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1114
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1115
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1117
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1118
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1119
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1120
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Edge-Gap is up. The 1121
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap is a 1122
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1123
But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1124

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 1126
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1127
Neutrosophic Edge-Gap is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1128
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1129

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 1130
. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Edge-Gap 1131

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Edge-Gap C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1133
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1134
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1135
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1136
called the Neutrosophic Edge-Gap and it’s an Neutrosophic Edge-Gap. Since it’s 1137
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1139
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1140
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1141
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1142
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1143

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Edge-Gap , 1144

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 1145
, not:
Edge-Gap 1146

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1147

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 1148
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1149
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1150
“Neutrosophic Edge-Gap ” 1151
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1152
Neutrosophic Edge-Gap , 1153
is only and only 1154

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1155
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1156
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1157
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1158
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1159
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1160
Then 1161

= {Ei ∈ EN SHG }.
X
= z |{Ei ∈EN SHG }| .
= {VEi ∩Ej =1 }.
X |V
= z Ei ∩Ej =1 | .
Proof. Let 1162
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1163
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 1164
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1165
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 1166
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperEdge-Gap. The latter is 1167
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1169
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1170
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1171
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1172
Then 1173

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1174
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Example (16.5)
1175
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 1176
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1177

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1181
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1182
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1183
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1185
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

Then 1186

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {CEN T ER}.
= z |CEN T ER| .
Proof. Let 1187
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1188
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1189
There’s a new way to redefine as 1190

Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1194
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1195
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1196
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1197
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1198
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1199
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1200

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1201
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
1202
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1203
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1204

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Thus the notion of 1207
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperEdge-Gap could be 1208
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 1209
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1210
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperEdge-Gap taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1211
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1212
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1213
solution 1214
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1215
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1216
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1217
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1218
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1219
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1220
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1221
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Example (16.11)
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1222
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1223

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1224
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
1225
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest SuperHyperEdge-Gap taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1226
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1227

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Thus the notion of 1230
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperEdge-Gap could be 1231
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 1232
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1234
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1235
solution 1237
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1239
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1240
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1241
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1242
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1243
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1244
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1245
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1246
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1247

= {}.
= 0z 0 .
= {}.
= 0z 0 .
Proof. Let 1248
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Example (16.13)
1249
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
is a longest SuperHyperEdge-Gap taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1250
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1251

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Thus the notion of quasi 1254
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperEdge-Gap could be applied. The 1255
unique embedded SuperHyperEdge-Gap proposes some longest SuperHyperEdge-Gap excerpt 1256
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1257
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1259
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1260
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1261
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1262
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1264
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1265
For the SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and the Neutrosophic 1266
SuperHyperEdge-Gap, some general results are introduced. 1267
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.15)
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap is “redefined” on the 1268
positions of the alphabets. 1269
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Then 1270
N eutrosophic SuperHyperEdge − Gap =

{theSuperHyperEdge − Gapof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperEdge − Gap
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperEdge−Gap. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1271
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1272
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1273
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1274
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap and 1275
SuperHyperEdge-Gap coincide. 1276
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1278
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap if and only if it’s a SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1279
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1281
SuperHyperEdge-Gap if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1282
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1283
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap is its 1284
SuperHyperEdge-Gap and reversely. 1285
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 1286
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1287
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap is its 1288
SuperHyperEdge-Gap and reversely. 1289
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1290
SuperHyperEdge-Gap isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEdge-Gap isn’t well-defined. 1291
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1292
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEdge-Gap 1293
isn’t well-defined. 1294
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1297
SuperHyperEdge-Gap isn’t well-defined. 1298
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1299
SuperHyperEdge-Gap is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperEdge-Gap is well-defined. 1300
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1301
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap is well-defined if and only if its 1302
SuperHyperEdge-Gap is well-defined. 1303
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap is well-defined if and only if its 1306
SuperHyperEdge-Gap is well-defined. 1307
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1308
is 1309
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1310
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1311
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1312
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1313
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1314
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1315
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1316
∅ is 1317
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1318
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1319
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1320
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1321
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1322
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1323
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1324
independent SuperHyperSet is 1325
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1326
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1327
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1328
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1329
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1330
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1331
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1332
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEdge-Gap/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a maximal 1333
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1334
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1335
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1336
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1337
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1338
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1339
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1340
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1341
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1342
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1343
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1344
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1345
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1346
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1347
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1348
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1349
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperEdge-Gap/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 1351
(i) : the SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1352
(ii) : the SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1353
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1354
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1355
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1356
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1357
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1358
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1359
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1361
(i) : the dual SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1362
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1363
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1364
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1365
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1366
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1367
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1368
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1371
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1372
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1373
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1374
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1378
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1379
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1380
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1383
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1384
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1385
is a 1386
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1390
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1391
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1392
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1395
number of 1396
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1400
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1401
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1402
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1403
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1404
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1405
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1407
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1408
(iv) : SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1412
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1413
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1414
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1415
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1416
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1417
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1418
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1419
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1423
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1425
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1427
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1428
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1432
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1433
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1434
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1436
SuperHyperEdge-Gap/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1438
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1439
of a dual 1440
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1444
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1445
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1446
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1448
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1449
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1450
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1456
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1457
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1458
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1459
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1460
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1461
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1462
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1463
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1464
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1465
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1466
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then 1467
(i) S is SuperHyperEdge-Gap set; 1468
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1469
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1470
Then 1471
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1472
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1473
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1474
which is connected. Then 1475
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1476
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1477
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1478
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1479
SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1480
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1481
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1482
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1483
a dual SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1484
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1485
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1486
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1487
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1488
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1489
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1490
dual SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1491
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Then 1492
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1493
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1495
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1496
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1497
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1498
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Then 1500
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1501
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1503
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1504
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1505
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1507
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1508
(ii) Γ = 1; 1509
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1510
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1511
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1512
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1513
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1514
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1515
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1516
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1517
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1518
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1519
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1520
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1522
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1523
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1524
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1526
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1527
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1528

bnc ; 1529
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1530
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1532
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1533
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1534
SuperHyperEdge-Gap for N SHF; 1535
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1536
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1537
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1538
SuperHyperEdge-Gap for N SHF : (V, E). 1539
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1540
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1541
SuperHyperSet. Then 1542
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1543
SuperHyperEdge-Gap for N SHF; 1544
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1545

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1546
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperEdge-Gap for 1547
N SHF : (V, E). 1548
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1549
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1550
SuperHyperSet. Then 1551
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap 1552
for N SHF : (V, E); 1553
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1554

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1555
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperEdge-Gap for 1556
N SHF : (V, E). 1557
Then following statements hold; 1559
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1560
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1561
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1563
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperDefensive 1564
Then following statements hold; 1567
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1568
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1569
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1571
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap, then S is a dual s-SuperHyperPowerful 1572
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1574
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1575
statements hold; 1576
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1577
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1578
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1579
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1581
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1583
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1584
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1585
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1586
statements hold; 1587
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1588
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1590
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1592
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1594
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1595
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1597
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1598
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1599
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1601
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1603
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1606
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1608
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1609
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1610
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1612
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1614
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap; 1615
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1617
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1619
SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Then following statements hold; 1620
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1621
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1623
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1625
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1628
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1630
SuperHyperEdge-Gap. Then following statements hold; 1631
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1632
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1634
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1636
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1639
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1640
Neutrosophic Recognition 1641
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1642
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1643
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1644
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1645
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1646
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1647
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1648
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1649
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1650
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1651
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1652
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1653
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1654
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1655
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1656
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1657
happened and what’s done. 1658
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1659
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1660
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1661
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1662
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperEdge-Gap, SuperHyperStar, 1663
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1664
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap or the Neutrosophic 1665
SuperHyperEdge-Gap in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1666
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

sophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1667
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1668
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1669
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1670
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1671
featured. 1672
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1673
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1674
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1675
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1676
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the 1677
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (29), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1678
Figure 30. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1679
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1680
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1681
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1682
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1683
Neutrosophic featured. 1684
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1685
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1686
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1687
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1688
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1689
SuperHyperModel (30), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. 1690
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1691
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1692
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1693
The SuperHyperEdge-Gap and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap are defined on a 1694
real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1695
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1696
recognitions? 1697
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperEdge-Gap and 1698
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap? 1699
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1700
compute them? 1701
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1702
SuperHyperEdge-Gap and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap? 1703
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperEdge-Gap and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap do a 1704
SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 1705
are there else? 1706
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1707
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1708
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1709
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1710
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1711
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1712
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1713
highlighted. 1714
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1715
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1716
SuperHyperEdge-Gap. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1717
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1718
the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1719
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap, finds the convenient background to implement some 1720
results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic 1721
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1722
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1723
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1724
SuperHyperEdge-Gap, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. 1725
Some general results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperEdge-Gap and the 1726
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews 1727
have taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled 1728
the lines containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and 1729
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s 1730
Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the 1731
cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded 1732
styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based 1733
on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with 1734
the formation of the design and the architecture are formally called “ 1735
SuperHyperEdge-Gap” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” 1736
refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the background for the 1737
SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this research are, figured 1738
out, pointed out and spoken out. 1739
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperEdge-Gap
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1740
Forms 1742
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1743
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1747
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1748
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1749
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1750
|Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1751
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1752
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1753
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1754
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1755
|Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1756
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1757
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1758
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1759
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1760
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1763
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1765
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1770
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1771
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1778
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1779
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1780
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1781
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1787
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1789
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1790
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1798
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1800
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1807
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1808
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1815
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1816
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1824
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1826
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1835
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1840
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1841
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1842
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1843
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1844
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1845
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1846
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1847
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.
SuperHyperDuality. 1856


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 1919
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1920
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 1921
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 1925
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1929
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1930
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1931
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 1932
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1943
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 1944
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1954
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 1957
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 1962
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1963
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1964
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1965
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1966
solution 1969
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1976

= {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 1979
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1980

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1986
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 1991
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1999
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 2001
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 2002
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 2003

∃!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 2009
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2010
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2017
Forms 2019
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2020
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2024
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2025
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2026
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2027
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2029
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2030
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2031
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2032
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2034
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2035
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2036
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2037
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2040
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2041
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2042
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2043
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2044
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2045
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2047
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2048
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2050
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2051
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2055
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2056
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2057
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2058
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2059
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2064
coefficient; 2065
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2066
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2071
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2072
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2075
coefficient; 2076
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2077
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2080
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2081
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2082
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2084
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2085
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2092
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2093
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2101
coefficient; 2102
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2103
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2112
coefficient. 2113
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2117
SuperHyperJoin. 2125
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 2199
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2203
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2207

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

.
Proof. Let 2210
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2221
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 2222

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2232
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 2235
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 2240
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2241
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2242
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2244
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2245
solution 2247
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2254

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 2257
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2258

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2262
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2263
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2264
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2269
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2277

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

.
Proof. Let 2280
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2281

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2285
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2286
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2287
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2288
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2295
Forms 2297
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2298
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2302
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2303
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2304
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2305
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2307
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2308
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2309
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2310
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2312
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2313
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2314
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2315
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2318
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2320
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2325
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2326
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2333
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2334
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2335
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2336
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2342
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2344
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2345
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2353
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2355
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2362
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2363
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2370
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2371
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2379
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2381
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2390
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2395
SuperHyperPerfect. 2403
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 2477
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2481
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2485
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 2488
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2499
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2500

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2510
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 2513
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 2518
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2519
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2522
solution 2525
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2532

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 2535
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2536

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2540
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2541
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2547
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2555
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2558

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2559

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2563
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2564
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2565
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2573
Forms 2575
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2576
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2580
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2581
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2582
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2583
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2585
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2586
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2587
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2588
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2590
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2591
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2592
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2593
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2596
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2598
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2601
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2603
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2604
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2606
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2611
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2612
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2613
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2620
coefficient; 2621
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2622
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2628
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2631
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2633
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2638
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2640
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2641
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2648
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2649
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2657
coefficient; 2658
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2659
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2668
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2673
SuperHyperTotal. 2681
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 2755
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2759
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2763
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 2766
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 2777
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 2778
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2788
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 2791
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2796
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2797
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2800
solution 2803
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2810

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 2813
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2814

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2818
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2819
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2825
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2833
∗
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 2836
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2837

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2841
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2842
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2843
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2851
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2852
Forms 2853
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2854
SuperHyperConnected). 2855
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2859
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2860
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2861
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2862
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2863
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2864
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2866
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2867
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2868
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2869
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2870
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2871
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2873
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2874
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2875
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2876
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2879
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2881
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2882
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2883
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2884
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2886
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2887
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2891
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2894
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2895
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2896
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2897
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2898
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2899
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2900
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2901
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2902
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2903
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2904
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2905
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2906
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2907
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2908
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2909
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2910
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2911
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 2912
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2913
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2914
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2915
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2916
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2919
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2920
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 2921
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 2922
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2923
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2924
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2928
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2931
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2932
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2935
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 2936
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 2937
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2938
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 2939
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2941
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2943
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2946
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2947
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2948
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2949
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2952
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 2953
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2957
SuperHyperConnected. 2965
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 3039
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 3043
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3047
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 3050
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 3061
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 3062
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3072
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 3075
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3080
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3081
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3084
solution 3087
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3094
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 3097
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3102
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3103
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3109
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3117
∗
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 3120
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3122

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3125
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3126
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3127
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3128
17 Background 3136
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3137
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3138
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3139
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3140
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett 3141
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3142
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3143
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3144
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3145
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3146
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3147
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3148
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3149
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3150
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3151
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3152
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3153
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3154
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3155
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3156
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3157
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3158
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3159
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3160
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3161
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3162
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3163
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3164
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3165
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3166
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3167
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3168
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3169
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3170
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3171
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3172
SuperHyperNumbers. 3173
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3174
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3175
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research 3176
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3177
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3178
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3179
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3180
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 2 and issue 1 with pages 3181
16-24. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3182
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3183
results based on initial background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing 3184
Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside 3185
(Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 3186
(2022), “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by 3187
Henry Garrett (2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3188
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3189
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty 3190
On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward 3191
Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled 3192
Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of 3193
Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” 3194
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The 3195
Cells and Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3196
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) 3197
SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3198
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and 3199
Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed 3200
SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3201
in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the 3202
Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes 3203
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism 3204
of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition 3205
Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3206
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3207
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 3208
Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on 3209
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry 3210
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction 3211
To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And 3212
Beyond ” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on 3213
Cancer’s Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” 3214
in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3215
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3216
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3217
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3218
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3219
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3220
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3221
in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3222
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3223
Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3224
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3225
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3226
And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3227
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3228
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3229
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3230
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3231
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3232
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3233
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3234
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3235
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [165] by Henry 3236
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3237
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3238
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [166] by Henry Garrett 3239
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3240
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3241
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [167] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3242
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3243
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3244
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [168] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3245
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3246
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [171] by 3247
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3248
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3249
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [172] by Henry 3250
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3251
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3252
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [175] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3253
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3254
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [178] by Henry 3255
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3256
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3257
in Ref. [179] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3258
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3259
Ref. [180] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3260
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3261
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [181] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3262
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3263
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [182] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3264
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3265
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [183] by Henry Garrett 3266
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3267
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [194] by Henry 3268
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3269
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3270
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [195] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–195], there 3271
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3272
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3273
at [196–306]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3274
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [307, 308]. 3275
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3276
proposed as book in Ref. [307] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3277
Scholar and has more than 4331 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3278
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3279
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3280
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3281
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3282
proposed as book in Ref. [308] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3283
Scholar and has more than 5327 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3284
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3285
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3286
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3287
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3288
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3289
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3290
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3291
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3292
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–195] 3293
alongside scientific research books at [196–306]. Two popular scientific research books 3294
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4331 and 5327 respectively, on neutrosophic 3295
science is on [307, 308]. 3296
References 3297
1. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3298
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3299
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3300
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3301
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3302
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3303
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3304
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3305
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3306
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3307
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3308
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3309
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3310
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3311
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3312
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3313
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3314
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3315
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. 3316
(https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/neutrosophic-codegree- 3317
and-neutrosophic-degree-alongside-chromatic-numbers-in-the-setting-of-some- 3318
classes-related-to-neut.pdf) 3319
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3320
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3321
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3322
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3323
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3324
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3325
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3326
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3327
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3328
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3329
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3330
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3331
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3333
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3334
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3335
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3336
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3337
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3338
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3339
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3340
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3341
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3342
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3343
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3344
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3345
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3346
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3347
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3348
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3349
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3350
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3351
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3352
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3353
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3354
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3355
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3356
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3357
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3358
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3359
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3360
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3361
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3362
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3363
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3364
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3365
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3366
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3367
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3368
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3369
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3370
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3371
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3372
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3373
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3374
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3376
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3380
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3381
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3382
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3383
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3384
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3385
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3386
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3387
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3388
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3389
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3390
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3391
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3392
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3393
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3394
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3395
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3396
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3397
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3398
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3399
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3400
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3401
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3402
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3403
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3404
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904671). 3405
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3407
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3408
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3409
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3410
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3411
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3412
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3413
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3415
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3416
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3418
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3421
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3424
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3427
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3428
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3430
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3433
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7853867). 3434
36. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3435
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3436
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3439
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3442
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3445
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3446
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3448
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3451
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3452
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3454
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3457
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3460
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3463
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3466
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3469
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3470
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3472
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3473
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3475
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3476
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3478
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3481
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3484
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3485
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3487
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3490
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3491
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3492
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3494
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3495
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3497
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3498
57. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3499
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3500
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3503
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3506
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3507
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3509
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3510
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3512
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3515
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3518
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3521
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3524
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3527
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3530
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3533
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3536
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3538
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3539
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3540
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3542
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3545
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3546
73. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3547
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3548
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3549
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3551
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3554
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3557
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3558
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3560
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3561
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3563
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3564
79. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3565
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3566
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3567
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3569
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3572
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3575
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3576
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3578
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3581
85. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3583
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3585
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3587
87. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3589
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3590
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3593
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3595
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3596
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3599
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3601
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3603
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3605
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3607
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3608
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3611
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3612
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3614
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3617
97. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3619
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3621
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3623
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3624
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3626
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3628
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3630
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3632
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3633
102. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3634
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3635
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3636
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3638
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3639
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3640
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3641
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3644
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3646
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3647
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3650
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3652
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3653
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3656
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3658
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3660
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3662
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3663
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3664
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3665
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3668
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3669
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3670
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3671
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3674
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3675
116. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3676
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3677
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3680
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3681
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3682
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3683
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3686
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3687
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3688
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3689
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3692
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3693
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3694
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3695
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3697
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3698
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3701
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3702
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3703
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3704
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3707
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3708
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3709
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3710
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3713
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3715
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3716
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3719
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3721
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3722
132. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3724
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3725
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3728
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3731
135. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3733
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3734
136. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3736
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3737
137. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3739
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3740
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3741
138. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3742
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3743
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3744
139. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3745
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3746
140. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3748
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3749
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3750
141. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3751
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3752
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3753
142. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3754
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3755
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3756
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3757
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3760
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3761
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3764
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3765
145. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3766
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3768
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3769
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3772
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3773
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3776
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3777
148. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3778
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3779
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3780
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3781
149. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3782
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3783
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3784
150. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3785
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3786
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3787
151. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3788
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3789
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3790
152. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3791
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3792
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3793
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3794
153. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3795
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3796
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3797
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3798
154. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3799
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3800
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3801
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3802
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3803
155. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3804
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3805
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3806
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3807
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3808
156. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3809
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3810
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3811
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3812
157. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3813
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3814
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3815
158. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3816
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3819
159. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3820
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3821
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3822
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3823
160. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3824
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3825
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3826
161. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3827
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3828
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3829
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3830
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3831
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3832
162. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3833
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3834
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3835
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3836
163. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3837
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3838
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3839
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3840
164. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3841
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3842
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3843
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3844
165. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3845
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3846
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3847
166. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3848
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3849
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3850
167. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3852
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3853
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3854
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3855
168. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3856
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3857
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3858
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3859
169. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3860
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3861
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3862
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3863
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3865
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3866
171. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3867
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3868
172. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3870
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3871
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3872
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3877
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3881
175. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3882
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3883
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3884
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3885
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3888
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3890
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3891
178. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3892
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3893
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3896
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3897
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3899
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3900
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3903
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3904
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3906
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3907
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3910
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3911
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3913
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3914
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3916
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3921
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3922
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3926
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3927
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3930
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3933
190. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3934
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3935
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3936
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3937
191. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3938
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3939
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3940
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3941
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3944
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3945
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3948
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3949
194. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3950
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3951
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3952
195. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3953
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3954
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3955
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3956
196. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3957
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7905287). 3958
197. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3959
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904586). 3960
198. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3961
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7874677). 3962
199. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3963
200. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3965
201. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3967
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 3968
202. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3969
203. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3971
204. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3973
205. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3975
206. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3977
207. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3979
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 3980
208. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3981
209. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3983
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 3984
210. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3985
211. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3987
212. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3989
213. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3991
214. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3993
215. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3995
216. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3997
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 3998
217. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3999
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4000
218. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4001
219. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4003
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4004
220. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4005
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4006
221. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4007
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4008
222. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4009
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4010
223. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4011
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4012
224. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4013
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4014
225. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4015
226. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4017
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4018
227. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4019
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4020
228. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4021
229. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4023
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4024
230. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4025
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4026
231. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4027
232. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4029
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4030
233. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4031
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4032
234. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4033
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4034
235. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4035
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4036
236. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4037
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4038
237. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4039
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4040
238. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4041
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4042
239. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4043
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4044
240. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4045
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4046
241. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4047
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4048
242. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4049
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4050
243. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4051
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4052
244. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4053
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4054
245. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4055
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4056
246. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4057
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4058
247. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4059
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4060
248. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4061
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4062
249. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4063
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4064
250. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4065
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4066
251. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4067
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4068
252. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4069
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4070
253. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4071
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4072
254. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4073
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4074
255. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4075
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4076
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4077
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4078
257. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4079
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4080
258. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4081
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4082
259. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4083
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4084
260. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4085
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4086
261. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4087
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4088
262. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4089
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4090
263. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4091
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4092
264. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4093
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4094
265. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4095
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4096
266. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4097
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4098
267. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4099
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4100
268. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4101
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4102
269. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4103
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4104
270. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4105
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4106
271. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4107
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4108
272. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4109
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4110
273. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4111
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4112
274. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4113
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4114
275. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4115
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4116
276. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4117
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4118
277. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4119
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4120
278. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4121
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4122
279. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4123
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4124
280. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4125
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4126
281. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4127
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4128
282. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4129
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4130
283. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4131
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4132
284. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4133
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4134
285. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4135
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4136
286. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4137
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4138
287. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4139
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4140
288. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4141
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4142
289. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4143
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4144
290. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4145
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4146
291. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4147
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4148
292. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4149
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4150
293. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4151
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4152
294. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4153
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4154
295. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4155
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4156
296. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4157
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4158
297. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4159
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4160
298. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4161
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4162
299. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4163
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4164
300. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4165
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4166
301. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4167
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4168
302. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4169
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4170
303. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4171
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4172
304. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4173
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4174
305. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4175
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4176
306. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4177
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4178
307. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4179
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4180
308. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4181
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4182
View publication stats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab

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 Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab

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 · May 2023

473 PUBLICATIONS 16,425 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

On Combinatorics View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super 3

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperEdge-Gap). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a Edge-Gap 10

pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and 11

E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap 12

if the following expression is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 13

Ea makes connectivity components;

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 14

e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 15

Ea makes connectivity components;

and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 16

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 17

v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 18

Va makes connectivity components;

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 19

v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap criteria holds 20

Va makes connectivity components;

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 21

SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 22

re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic 23

rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperEdge-Gap). Assume a Neutrosophic 24

SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 25

SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 26

SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 27

re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic 28

rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 29

N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 30

of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive 31

Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 32

that they form the Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap if 33

it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 34

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and 35

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 36

Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 37

SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 38

SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 39

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap; an Extreme SuperHyperEdge-Gap 40

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic 41

re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic 42

rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 43

N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 44

Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 46

consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 47

Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge-Gap SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 49

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 50

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperEdge-Gap and 51

C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 52

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 53

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 54

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 55

consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 56

corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperEdge-Gap if it’s 58

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperEdge-Gap, 59