New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Matrix-Based As Hyper Mat On Super Matte

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/371110081
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super matte
Preprint · May 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7978571
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
477 PUBLICATIONS 17,440 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Combinatorics View project
Featured Articles View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 28 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 Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super 3
matte 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
SuperHyperMatrix-Based). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 10
Matrix-Based pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 13
e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 14
The incidence matrix forms;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 15
e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 16
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 17
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 19
The adjacency matrix forms;
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 20
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 21
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 23
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and 24
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatrix-Based). Assume 25
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 26
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 27
Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 28
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 30
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 31
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the 32
consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 33
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; a 34
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 35
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 37
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 38
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 39
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 40
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; an 41
Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 42
e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic 43
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for 44
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 45
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 46
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 47
of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 48
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the 49
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 50
SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 51
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a 53
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 54
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 55
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 56
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 57
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 58
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the Neutrosophic power is 59
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s 60
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 61
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and 62
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 63
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 64
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 65
and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 66
SuperHyperMatrix-Based; a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of 67
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 68
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and 69
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 70
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 71
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 72
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 73
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; an Extreme V-SuperHyperMatrix-Based 74
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 75
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 77
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 78
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 79
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 80
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 81
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the 82
Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 83
SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 84
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a 86
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 89
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 90
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 91
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and 92
the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific 93
research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 94
SuperHyperMatrix-Based and Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Two different types of 95
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 96
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 97
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 98
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 99
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 100
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 101
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 102
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 103
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 104
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 105
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 106
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 107
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 108
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 109
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 110
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 111
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 112
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 113
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 114
δ−SuperHyperMatrix-Based is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a maximum 115
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the (Neutrosophic) 116
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 117
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 118
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 119
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperMatrix-Based is a 120
maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 121
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 122
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 123
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 124
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 125
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 126
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 127
version of a SuperHyperMatrix-Based . Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make 128
a SuperHyperMatrix-Based more understandable. For the sake of having Neutrosophic 129
SuperHyperMatrix-Based, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperMatrix-Based 130
”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from 131
the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels 132
to assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperMatrix-Based . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 133
SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of 134
Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The 135
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & 136
The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The 137
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of 138
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 139
“The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get 140
structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of 141
SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperMatrix-Based . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary 142
to have the foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s 143
a need to have all SuperHyperMatrix-Based until the SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then it’s 144
officially called a “SuperHyperMatrix-Based” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperMatrix-Based . 145
There are some instances about the clarifications for the main definition titled a 146
“SuperHyperMatrix-Based ”. These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since 147
there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a 148
SuperHyperMatrix-Based . For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 149
there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based” and a 150
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 151
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 152
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 153
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the 154
intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperMatrix-Based are redefined to a “Neutrosophic 155
SuperHyperMatrix-Based” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” 156
version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results 157
to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based more understandable. Assume a 158
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if 159
the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 160
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 161
SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 162
SuperHyperMatrix-Based”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic 163
SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic 164
SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a 165
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based” where it’s the strongest [the maximum 166
Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperMatrix-Based amid the maximum value amid 167
all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperMatrix-Based .] SuperHyperMatrix-Based . A graph 168
is a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 169
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 170
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 171
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 172
SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 173
SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 174
all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 175
amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, 176
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one 177
SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, 178
forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 179
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 180
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 181
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 182
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 183
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 184
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 185
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 186
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 187
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 188
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 189
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 190
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 191
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 192
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 193
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 194
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 195
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 196
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 197
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 198
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 199
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 200
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 201
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 202
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperMatrix-Based or the strongest 203
SuperHyperMatrix-Based in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest 204
SuperHyperMatrix-Based, called SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and the strongest 205
SuperHyperMatrix-Based, called Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, some general results 206
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have 207
only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 208
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperMatrix-Based. There isn’t any 209
formation of any SuperHyperMatrix-Based but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 210
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic familiarity 211
with Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic 212
SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 213
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Cancer’s 214
Neutrosophic Recognition 215
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 216
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 217
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 218
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 219
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 220
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 221
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 222
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 223
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 224
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 225
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 226
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 227
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 228
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 229
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 230
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 231
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 232
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 233
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 234
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 235
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 236
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 237
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 238
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 239
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 240
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 241
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 242
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 243
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 244
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 245
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 246
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 247
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 248
formally called “ SuperHyperMatrix-Based” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The 249
prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 250
background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term 251
function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 252
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 253
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 254
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 255
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 256
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 257
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 258
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 259
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 260
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperMatrix-Based, SuperHyperStar, 261
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 262
either the optimal SuperHyperMatrix-Based or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in 263
those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond 264
that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two 265
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 266
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperMatrix-Based. There isn’t any 267
formation of any SuperHyperMatrix-Based but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 268
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 269
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 270
find the “ amount of SuperHyperMatrix-Based” of either individual of cells or the groups of 271
cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount of 272
SuperHyperMatrix-Based” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of group of 273
cells? 274
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 275
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 276
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 277
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 278
SuperHyperMatrix-Based” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based” on 279
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 280
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 281
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 282
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 283
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 284
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 285
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 286
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 287
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 288
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 289
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 290
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 291
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperMatrix-Based and 292
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, are figured out in sections “ SuperHyperMatrix-Based” 293
and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based”. In the sense of tackling on getting results 294
and in Matrix-Based to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of 295
SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their 296
consequences, corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in 297
this section, titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 298
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 299
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 300
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 301
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 302
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 303
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 304
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 305
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 306
SuperHyperMatrix-Based”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based”, “Results on 307
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are 308
curious questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about 309
excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the description 310
and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperMatrix-Based”. The 311
keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” 312
with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite 313
as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 314
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 315
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 316
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 317
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 318
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 319
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 320
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 321
Research On the Redeemed Ways 322
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 323
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [199],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic 324
Set](Ref. [199],Definition 2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 325
(NSHG)](Ref. [199],Definition 2.5,p.2), [Characterization of the Neutrosophic 326
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [199],Definition 2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [199], 327
Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 328
(NSHG)](Ref. [199],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic 329
SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [199],Definition 5.3,p.7), and [Different Neutrosophic Types of 330
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] (Ref. [199],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new 331
ideas and their clarifications are addressed to Ref. [199]. 332
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 333
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 334
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [199],Definition 2.1,p.1). 335
Let X be a Matrix-Based 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 336
+
]− 0, 1 [. 337
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [199],Definition 2.2,p.2). 338
Let X be a Matrix-Based 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. [199],Definition 339
2.5,p.2). 340
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 341
pair S = (V, E), where 342
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 343
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 344
1, 2, . . . , n); 345
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 346
V; 347
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 348
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 349
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 350
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 351
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 352
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 353
(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 . 354
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 355
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 356
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 357
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 358
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 359
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 360
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 361
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 362
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 363
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 364
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 365
(Ref. [199],Definition 2.7,p.3). 366
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 367
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 368
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 369
characterized as follow-up items. 370
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 371
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 372
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 373
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 374
HyperEdge; 375
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 376
SuperEdge; 377
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 378
SuperHyperEdge. 379
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 380
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 381
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [199], Definition 2.7, p.3). 382
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 383
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 384
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 385
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 386
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 387
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 388
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)). 389
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 390
pair S = (V, E), where 391
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 392
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 393
1, 2, . . . , n); 394
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 395
V; 396
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 397
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 398
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 399
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 400
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 401
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 402
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 403
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 404
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 405
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 406
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 407
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 408
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 409
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 410
the ii0 th element of the incidence matrix of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) 411
are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V and E are crisp sets. 412
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 413
(Ref. [199],Definition 2.7,p.3). 414
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 415
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 416
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 417
characterized as follow-up items. 418
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 419
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 420
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 421
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 422
HyperEdge; 423
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 424
SuperEdge; 425
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 426
SuperHyperEdge. 427
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 428
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 429
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 430
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 431
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 432
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 433
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 434
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 435
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 436
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 437
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 438
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 439
given SuperHyperEdges; 440
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 441
SuperHyperEdges; 442
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 443
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 444
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 445
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 446
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 447
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 448
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 449
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 450
common SuperVertex. 451
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 452
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 453
of following conditions hold: 454
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 455
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 456
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 457
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 458
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 459
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 460
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 461
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 462
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 463
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 464
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 465
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. 466
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 467
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 468
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 469
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 470
SuperHyperPath . 471
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 472
(Ref. [199],Definition 5.3,p.7). 473
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 474
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 475
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 476
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 477
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 478
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 479
(NSHE)). (Ref. [199],Definition 5.4,p.7). 480
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 481
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 482
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 483
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 484
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 485
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 486
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 487
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 489
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 490
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 492
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 493
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 494
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 495
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 496
SuperHyperMatrix-Based). 497
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 499
either V 0 or E 0 is called 500
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called 501
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 502
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called 503
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 504
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 505
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called 506
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 507
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called 508
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 509

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 510
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic 511
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 513
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatrix-Based). 514
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic 517
v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and 519
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 520
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 521
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 522
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 523
Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 524
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic 525
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 529
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 532
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 533
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 534
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based 535
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 536
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 537
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 538
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 539
Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 541
Extreme coefficient; 542
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 543
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic 544
re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic 545
rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 546
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 547
Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 548
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded 552
to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 553
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic 554
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 559
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 560
the Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 561
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic 562
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 566
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 567
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 568
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 569
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 570
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 571
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based 572
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 573
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 575
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 576
Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 578
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 580
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic 581
re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic 582
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
rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 583
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 584
Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 585
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; and the Neutrosophic power is 589
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 590
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperMatrix-Based). 591
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 592
(i) an δ−SuperHyperMatrix-Based is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 593
SuperHyperMatrix-Based such that either of the following expressions hold for the 594
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 595
|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 596
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 597
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperMatrix-Based is a Neutrosophic kind of 598
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based such that either of the following Neutrosophic 599
expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 600
s∈S: 601
|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. 602
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 603
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 604
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, there’s a need to 605
“redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The SuperHyperVertices 606
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 607
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 608
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 609
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 610
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 611
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 612
understandable. 613

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 614
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 615
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperMatrix-Based, SuperHyperStar, 616
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are 617
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle, 618
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite, 619
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and Neutrosophic 620
SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 621
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 622
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 623
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based more Neutrosophicly understandable. 624
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, there’s a need to 625
“redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based”. The 626
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 627
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 628
assign to the values. 629
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperMatrix-Based. It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 630
SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the Table (3) holds. 631
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As The Matrix-Based 632
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 633
Forms 634
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 635
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is called 637
Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is called 638
Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic probability 639
of A. 640
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 641
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 643
Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 644
s-independent criteria 645
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 646
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 647
criteria 648
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 649
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Any k-function Matrix-Based like E is called 651
Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Matrix-Based like E is called 652
Neutrosophic Variable. 653
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 654
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 655
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is 657
called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 658
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 659
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 660
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. A Neutrosophic number is called Neutrosophic 662
Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic Crossing criteria 663
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 664
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let m and n propose special 665
Matrix-Based. Then with m ≥ 4n, 666
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 667
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 668
Neutrosophic independently with probability Matrix-Based p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] 669
and H := G[S]. 670
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: 671
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
672
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 673
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of 674
n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperLines

√ in the 675
plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then 676
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 677
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 678
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points 679
on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 680
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 681
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 682
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 683
2 3
again l < 32n /k . 684
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of 686
n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 687
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 688
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 689
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 690
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 691
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 692
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
693
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 694
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on 695
the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 696
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 697
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 698
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 699
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 700
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 701
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 702
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 703
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 704
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let X be a nonnegative 705
Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 706
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. 707
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 708
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let Xn be a nonnegative 709
integer-valued variable in a probability Matrix-Based (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 as 710
n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 711
Proof. 712
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. A special SuperHyperGraph 714
in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 715
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is 717
up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of 718
G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 719
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 720
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 721
G. 722
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 723
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 724
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 725
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 726
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: 727
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 728
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 729
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 730
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 731
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 732
stability number at most k. 733
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 734
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a number is 736
called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 737
Variance criteria 738
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let X be a Neutrosophic 740
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 741
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let X be a Neutrosophic Variable and 743
let t be a positive real number. Then 744
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
745
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let Xn be a Neutrosophic 747
Variable in a probability Matrix-Based (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 748
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 749
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 751
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 752
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 753
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 755
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 756
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 757
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 758
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 760
result is straightforward. 761
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let f and 763
k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 764
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 765
or 766
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 767
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. The latter is straightforward. 769
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 770
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let P be a monotone property of 772
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 773
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 774
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 775
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 776
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 777
S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 779
Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a copy of F as a 780
Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 781
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. Let F be a nonempty 783
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 784
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 785
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 786
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Matrix-Based. The latter is straightforward. 788
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 789
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 790
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 791
SuperHyperMatrix-Based, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 792
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 793
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 794
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 795
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 796
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 797
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 798
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 799
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 800
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Matrix-Based =

 
0 1 0 1
0 0 0 1
 
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Matrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial
= 2z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Matrix-Based =
 
0 1 0 1
1 0 0 1
 
0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Matrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial
= z3.
801
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 804
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 805
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 806
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 807
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 808
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 809

 
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
 
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1
= 3z.
 
0 1 0 1
1 0 0 1
 
0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0
= z3.
811

straightforward. 814

 
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1
= 3z.
 
0 1 1
1 0 1
1 1 0
= z3.
815


 
0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 1 1
 
1 0 0 1 1
 
1 1 0 0 0
 
0 0 1 1 1
 
1 1 0 0 0
 
0 0 0 1 1
0 2 0 0 0
= z3 + z2.
 
0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0
1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
 
1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0
 
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
 
1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0
 
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
 
1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
= 2z 5 + 2z 3 .
819


 
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
 
0 0 1 0
 
0 0 0 1
1 1 1 1
= z4.
 
0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1
 
0 0 0 0 1
 
0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1
= z.
823


 
0 ... 1 ... 1 ... 0
 0 ... 1 ... 1 ... 0 
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 ... 1 ... 1 ... 0
= za.
 
0 ... 1 ... 1 ... 1 ... 0
 0 ... 1 ... 1 ... 1 ... 0
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
0 ... 1 ... 1 ... 1 ... 0
= zb.
827


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
831


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
835


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
839


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
843
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
847


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
851


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
855


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
859



 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
863


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
867


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
871


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
875


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
879


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
883


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
887


 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
891
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 892
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 893
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 894
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 895
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 896
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 897
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 898
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 899
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 900
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based minus all Neutrosophic 901
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 902
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 903
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based, minus all 904
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 905
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-Matrix-Based is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based is 906
at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 907
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 908
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 909
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 910
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Matrix-Based in some cases but the 911
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Neutrosophic 912
number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 913
are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. 914
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Matrix-Based 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-Matrix-Based with the least Neutrosophic cardinality, 915
the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 916
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 917
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 918
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−M atrix−Based

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−M atrix−BasedSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−M atrix−Based = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−M atrix−BasedSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Matrix-Based. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower 919
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Matrix-Based is the cardinality 920
of 921

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−M atrix−BasedSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−M atrix−Based = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−M atrix−BasedSuperHyperP 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-Matrix-Based
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-Matrix-Based. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp bound for
the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Matrix-Based 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-Matrix-Based. 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 922
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 923
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 924
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 925
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 926
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 927
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 928
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 929
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based 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-Matrix-Based. 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-Matrix-Based has the
Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic
R-Matrix-Based has the Neutrosophic cardinality at least a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge.
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based 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-Matrix-Based” 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-Matrix-Based 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-Matrix-Based for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 930
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 931
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 932
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 933
free-quasi-triangle. 934
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-Matrix-Based. Those Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are
potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Matrix-Based. 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-Matrix-Based is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based but with
slightly differences in the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality amid those Neutrosophic
type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Thus the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Neutrosophic cardinality ,

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. Let

E
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, 935
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based =
E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
936
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based =
Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based where E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is

fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic intended
SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Matrix-Based, 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-Matrix-Based is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based 937
is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of 938
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 939
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 940
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 941
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Matrix-Based in some cases but the 942
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 943
Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic 944
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. 945
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 946
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 947
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 948
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 949
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 950
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 951
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 952
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 953
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 954
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 955
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 956
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based where the 957
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 958
literarily, a Neutrosophic embedded R-Matrix-Based. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 959
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 960
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 961
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 962
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 963
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 964
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. The interior 965
types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the Neutrosophic 966
number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior Neutrosophic 967
SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more formal, the 968
perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any distinct 969
types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. Thus 970
Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Neutrosophic 971
SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the interior 972
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In the 973
embedded Neutrosophic Matrix-Based, there’s the usage of exterior Neutrosophic 974
SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the 975
title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One Neutrosophic 976
SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 977
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement has been ignored in 978
the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. The 979
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based with the exclusion of the exclusion of all Neutrosophic 980
SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the 981
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based with the inclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in 982
one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based. To sum them 983
up, in a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 984
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the 985
maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of 986
any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor 987
to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique 988
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 989
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based, minus all Neutrosophic 990
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 991
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based has two titles. a Neutrosophic 992
quasi-R-Matrix-Based and its corresponded quasi-maximum Neutrosophic 993
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any 994
Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based with that 995
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 996
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 997
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 998
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Baseds for all Neutrosophic numbers less 999
than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the Neutrosophic 1000
ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the Neutrosophic

Matrix-Based 1001
quasi-R-Matrix-Based, again and more in the operations of collecting all the Neutrosophic 1002
quasi-R-Matrix-Baseds acted on the all possible used formations of the Neutrosophic 1003
SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. This Neutrosophic number is 1004
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Matrix-Baseds. Let 1005
zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based be a 1006
Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Matrix-Based. 1007
Then 1008
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based is re-formalized 1009
and redefined as follows. 1010
GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1011
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based. 1012
GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based =
{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 1013
Matrix-Based poses the upcoming expressions. 1014
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1015
= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1016

To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1017
GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1018
{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1019

1020

Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1021
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1022
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1023
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1024
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Matrix-Based” but, precisely, it’s the generalization 1025
of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Matrix-Based” since “Neutrosophic Quasi-Matrix-Based” happens 1026
“Neutrosophic Matrix-Based” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1027
background but “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens 1028
“Neutrosophic Matrix-Based” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1029
preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic 1030
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, 1031
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Neutrosophic Quasi-Matrix-Based”, and 1032
“Neutrosophic Matrix-Based” are up. 1033
Thus, let 1034
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1035
GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1036
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Matrix-Based and the new terms are up. 1037
GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1038
{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1039
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1040
And with go back to initial structure, 1041
GNeutrosophic Matrix-Based ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1042
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1043

1044

Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1045
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Matrix-Based if for 1046
any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some 1047
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic 1048
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic 1049
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1050
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1051
are coming up. 1052
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,

Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. The

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1053
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1054
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1055
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1056
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1057
Neutrosophic Matrix-Based 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 Matrix-Based is up. The
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based 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-Matrix-Based
is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-Matrix-Based. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1058
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1059
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1060
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1061
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based and it’s an Neutrosophic 1062
Matrix-Based. Since it’s 1063
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 Matrix-Based. There
isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based,

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

Matrix-Based, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1064
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1065
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1066
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1067
“Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based” 1068
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1069
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based, 1070
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-Matrix-Based amid those obvious
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1071
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1072
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1073
quasi-R-Matrix-Based if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1074
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1075
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1076
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1077
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1078
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1079
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1080
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1081
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1082
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1083
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based with the least cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic 1084
bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1085
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1086
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1087
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1088
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1089
R-Matrix-Based. Since it doesn’t have 1090
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1092
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1093
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1094
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1095
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic procedure 1096
such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic 1097
SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1098
outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1099
ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its Neutrosophic 1100
SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the Neutrosophic 1101
SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. There’s only one 1102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1103
VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the 1104
obvious Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based, VESHE is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic 1105
type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based, VESHE , is a Neutrosophic 1106
SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices does 1107
forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in 1108
a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic 1109
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1110
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1111
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1112
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1113
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1114
Neutrosophic R-Matrix-Based only contains all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 1115
and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique Neutrosophic 1116
SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1117
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1118
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1119
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1120
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1121
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Matrix-Based, is up. There’s neither empty 1122
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1123
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1124
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based. The Neutrosophic 1125
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1126

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

Matrix-Based 1127
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1128
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1129

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Matrix-Based C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1130
ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1131
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1133
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1134
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1135
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1136
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Matrix-Based is up. The 1137
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based is a 1138
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1139
But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1140

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 1142
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1143
Neutrosophic Matrix-Based is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1145

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 1146
. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Matrix-Based 1147

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Matrix-Based C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1149
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1150
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1151
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1152
called the Neutrosophic Matrix-Based and it’s an Neutrosophic Matrix-Based. Since it’s 1153
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1155
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1156
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1157
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1158
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1159

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Matrix-Based, 1160

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 1161
, not:
Matrix-Based 1162

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1163

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 1164
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1165
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1166
“Neutrosophic Matrix-Based ” 1167
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1168
Neutrosophic Matrix-Based , 1169
is only and only 1170

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1171
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1172
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1173
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1174
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1175
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1176
Then 1177

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
Proof. Let 1178
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1179
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 1180
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1181
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 1182
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperMatrix-Based. The latter is 1183
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1185
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1186
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1187
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Example (16.5)
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1188
Then 1189

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
Proof. Let 1190
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

1191
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 1192
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1193

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1197
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1198
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1199
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1201
Then 1202

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
Proof. Let 1203
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1204
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1205
There’s a new way to redefine as 1206

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1216

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
Proof. Let 1217
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1218
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1219
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1220

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

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Example (16.11)
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1239

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
Proof. Let 1240
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
1241
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1243

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Thus the notion of 1246
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperMatrix-Based could be 1247
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 1248
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1250
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1251
solution 1253
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1255
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1256
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1257
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1258
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1259
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1260
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1261
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1262
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Example (16.13)
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1263

 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= za.
 
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .
− ... − ... − ... − ... −
= zb.
Proof. Let 1264
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1265
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.15)
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1267

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Thus the notion of 1270
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperMatrix-Based could be 1271
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperMatrix-Based proposes some longest 1272
SuperHyperMatrix-Based excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 1273
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1276
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1277
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1278
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1279
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1281
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1282
For the SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and the 1283
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, some general results are introduced. 1284
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based is “redefined” on 1285
the positions of the alphabets. 1286
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Then 1287
N eutrosophic SuperHyperM atrix − Based =

{theSuperHyperM atrix − Basedof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperM atrix − Based
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperM atrix−Based. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1288
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1289
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1290
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1291
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based and 1292
SuperHyperMatrix-Based coincide. 1293
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1295
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based if and only if it’s a SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1296
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1298
SuperHyperMatrix-Based if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1299
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1300
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based is its 1301
SuperHyperMatrix-Based and reversely. 1302
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 1303
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1304
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based is 1305
its SuperHyperMatrix-Based and reversely. 1306
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1307
SuperHyperMatrix-Based isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperMatrix-Based isn’t 1308
well-defined. 1309
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1310
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1311
SuperHyperMatrix-Based isn’t well-defined. 1312
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1315
SuperHyperMatrix-Based isn’t well-defined. 1316
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1317
SuperHyperMatrix-Based is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperMatrix-Based is well-defined. 1318
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1319
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based is well-defined if and only if its 1320
SuperHyperMatrix-Based is well-defined. 1321
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based is well-defined if and only if its 1324
SuperHyperMatrix-Based is well-defined. 1325
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1326
is 1327
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1328
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1329
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1330
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1331
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1332
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1333
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1334
∅ is 1335
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1336
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1337
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1338
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1339
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1340
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1341
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1342
independent SuperHyperSet is 1343
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1344
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1345
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1346
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1347
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1348
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1349
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1350
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperMatrix-Based/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1351
maximal 1352
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1353
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1354
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1355
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1356
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1357
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1358
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1359
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1360
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1361
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1362
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1363
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1364
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1365
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1366
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1367
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1368
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperMatrix-Based/SuperHyperPath. Then the number of 1370
(i) : the SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1371
(ii) : the SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1372
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1373
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1374
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1375
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1376
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1377
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1378
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1380
(i) : the dual SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1381
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1382
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1383
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1384
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1385
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1386
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1387
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1390
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1391
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1392
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1393
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1397
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1398
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1399
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1402
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1403
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1404
is a 1405
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1409
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1410
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1411
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1414
number of 1415
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1419
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1420
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1421
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1422
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1423
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1424
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1426
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1427
(iv) : SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1431
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1432
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1433
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1434
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1435
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1436
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1437
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1438
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1442
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1444
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1446
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1447
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1451
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1452
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1453
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1455
SuperHyperMatrix-Based/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1457
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1458
of a dual 1459
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1463
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1464
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1465
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1467
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1468
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1469
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1475
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1476
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1477
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1478
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1479
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1480
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1481
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1482
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1483
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1484
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1485
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then 1486
(i) S is SuperHyperMatrix-Based set; 1487
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1488
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1489
Then 1490
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1491
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1492
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1493
which is connected. Then 1494
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1495
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1496
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1497
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1498
SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1499
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1500
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1501
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1502
a dual SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1503
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1504
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1505
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1506
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1507
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1508
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1509
dual SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1510
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Then 1511
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1512
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1514
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1515
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1516
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1517
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Then 1519
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1520
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1522
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1523
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1524
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1526
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1527
(ii) Γ = 1; 1528
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1529
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1530
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1531
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1532
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1533
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1534
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1535
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1536
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1537
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1538
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1539
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1541
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1542
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1543
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1545
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1546
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1548
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} bnc

2
; 1549
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1550
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1552
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1553
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1554
SuperHyperMatrix-Based for N SHF; 1555
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1556
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1557
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1558
SuperHyperMatrix-Based for N SHF : (V, E). 1559
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1560
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1561
SuperHyperSet. Then 1562
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1563
SuperHyperMatrix-Based for N SHF; 1564
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1565
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 1566
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperMatrix-Based 1567
for N SHF : (V, E). 1568
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1569
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1570
SuperHyperSet. Then 1571
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1572
SuperHyperMatrix-Based for N SHF : (V, E); 1573
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1574
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1575
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperMatrix-Based for 1576
N SHF : (V, E). 1577
Then following statements hold; 1579
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1580
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then S is an s-SuperHyperDefensive 1581
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1583
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then S is a dual 1584
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1585
Then following statements hold; 1587
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1588
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then S is an s-SuperHyperPowerful 1589
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1591
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based, then S is a dual 1592
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1593
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1594
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1595
statements hold; 1596
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1597
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1598
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1599
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1601
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1603
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1604
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1605
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1606
statements hold; 1607
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1608
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1610
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1612
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1614
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1615
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1617
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1618
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1619
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1621
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1623
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1626
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1628
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1629
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1630
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1632
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1634
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based; 1635
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1637
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1639
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Then following statements hold; 1640
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1641
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1643
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1645
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1648
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1650
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. Then following statements hold; 1651
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1652
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1654
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1656
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1659
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1660
Neutrosophic Recognition 1661
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1662
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1663
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1664
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1665
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1666
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1667
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1668
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1669
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1670
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1671
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1672
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1673
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1674
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1675
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1676
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1677
happened and what’s done. 1678
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1679
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1680
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1681
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1682
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperMatrix-Based, SuperHyperStar, 1683
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1684
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based or the Neutrosophic 1685
SuperHyperMatrix-Based in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1686
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1687
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1688
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1689
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1690
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1691
featured. 1692
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1693
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1694
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1695
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1696
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the 1697
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (29), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1698
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

sophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1699
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1700
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1701
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1702
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1703
Neutrosophic featured. 1704
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1705
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1706
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1707
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1708
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1709
SuperHyperModel (30), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based. 1710
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1711
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1712
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1713
The SuperHyperMatrix-Based and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based are defined 1714
on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1715
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1716
recognitions? 1717
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperMatrix-Based and 1718
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based? 1719
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1720
compute them? 1721
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1722
SuperHyperMatrix-Based and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based? 1723
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperMatrix-Based and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based do 1724
a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on 1725
SuperHyperMatrix-Based, are there else? 1726
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1727
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1728
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1729
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1730
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1731
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1732
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1733
highlighted. 1734
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1735
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1736
SuperHyperMatrix-Based. For that sake in the second definition, the main definition of the 1737
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the alphabets. Based on 1738
the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the new SuperHyperNotion, 1739
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based, finds the convenient background to implement 1740
some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic 1741
SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the regions where 1742
are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the 1743
title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, 1744
SuperHyperMatrix-Based, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are 1745
introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on the 1746
SuperHyperMatrix-Based and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based. The clarifications, 1747
instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this research, the 1748
literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the results. The 1749
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on 1750
the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this research. 1751
Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and 1752
embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1753
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1754
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1755
called “ SuperHyperMatrix-Based” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix 1756
“SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the background 1757
for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this research are, 1758
figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1759
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperMatrix-Based
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1760
Forms 1762
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1763
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1767
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1768
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1769
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1770
|Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1771
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1772
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1773
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1774
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1775
|Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1776
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1777
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1778
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1779
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1780
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1783
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1785
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1786
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1787
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1788
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1790
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1791
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1794
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1795
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1798
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1799
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1800
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1801
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1802
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1807
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1809
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1810
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1812
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1813
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1814
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1815
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 1816
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 1817
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1818
Neutrosophic coefficient; 1819
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1820
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1825
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1827
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1828
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1832
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1835
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1836
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1844
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1846
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1852
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1855
Neutrosophic coefficient. 1856
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1860
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1861
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1862
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1863
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1864
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1865
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1866
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1867
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. 1876


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 1939
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1940
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 1941
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 1945
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1949
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1950
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1951
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 1952
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 1963
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 1964
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1974
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 1977
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 1982
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1983
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1984
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1985
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1986
solution 1989
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1996

= {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 1999
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2000

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2006
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2011
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2019
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 2021
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 2022
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 2023
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2024

∃!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 2029
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2030
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2037
Forms 2039
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2040
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2044
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2045
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2046
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2047
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2049
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2050
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2051
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2052
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2054
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2055
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2056
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2057
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2060
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2061
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2062
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2063
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2064
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2065
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2067
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2068
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2070
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2071
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2075
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2076
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2077
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2078
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2079
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2084
coefficient; 2085
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2086
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2091
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2095
coefficient; 2096
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2097
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2100
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2101
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2102
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2104
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2105
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2112
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2113
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2121
coefficient; 2122
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2123
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2129
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2132
coefficient. 2133
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2137
SuperHyperJoin. 2145
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 2219
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2223
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2227

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

.
Proof. Let 2230
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2241
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 2242

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2252
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 2255
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 2260
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2261
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2262
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2264
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2265
solution 2267
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2274

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 2277
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2278

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2282
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2283
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2284
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2289
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2297

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

.
Proof. Let 2300
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2301

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2305
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2306
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2307
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2308
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2315
Forms 2317
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2318
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2322
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2323
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2324
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2325
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2327
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2328
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2329
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2330
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2332
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2333
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2334
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2335
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2338
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2340
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2343
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2345
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2346
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2353
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2354
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2355
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2356
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2362
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2364
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2365
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2370
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2373
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2375
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2380
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2382
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2383
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2390
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2391
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2399
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2401
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2407
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2410
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2415
SuperHyperPerfect. 2423
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 2497
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2501
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2505
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 2508
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2519
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2520

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2530
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 2533
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 2538
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2539
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2542
solution 2545
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2552

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 2555
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2556

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2560
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2561
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2567
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2575
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2578

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2579

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2583
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2584
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2585
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2586
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2593
Forms 2595
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2596
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2600
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2601
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2602
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2603
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2605
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2606
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2607
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2608
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2610
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2611
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2612
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2613
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2616
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2618
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2621
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2623
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2624
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2626
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2631
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2632
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2633
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2640
coefficient; 2641
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2642
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2651
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2653
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2658
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2660
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2661
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2668
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2669
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2677
coefficient; 2678
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2679
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2685
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2688
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2693
SuperHyperTotal. 2701
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 2775
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2779
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2783
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 2786
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 2797
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 2798
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2808
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 2811
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2816
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2817
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2820
solution 2823
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2830

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 2833
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2834

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2838
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2839
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2845
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2853
∗
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 2856
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2857

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2861
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2862
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2863
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2864
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2871
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2872
Forms 2873
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2874
SuperHyperConnected). 2875
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2879
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2880
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2881
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2882
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2883
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2884
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2886
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2887
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2888
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2889
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2890
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2891
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2893
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2894
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2895
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2896
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2899
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2901
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2904
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2906
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2907
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2914
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2915
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2916
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2917
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2918
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2919
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2920
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2921
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2922
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2923
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2924
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2925
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2926
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2927
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2928
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2929
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2930
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2931
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2934
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2935
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2936
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 2941
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 2942
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2943
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2944
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2951
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2952
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2955
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 2956
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 2957
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2958
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 2959
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2961
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2963
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2966
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2967
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2968
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2969
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2972
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 2973
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2977
SuperHyperConnected. 2985
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 3059
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 3063
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3067
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 3070
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 3081
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 3082
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3092
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 3095
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3100
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3101
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3104
solution 3107
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3114
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 3117
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3122
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3123
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3129
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3137
∗
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 3140
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3142

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3145
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3146
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3147
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3148
17 Background 3156
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3157
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3158
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3159
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3160
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [1] by Henry Garrett 3161
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3162
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3163
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3164
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3165
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3166
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3167
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3168
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3169
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3170
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3171
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3172
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3173
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3174
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3175
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3176
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3177
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3178
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3179
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3180
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3181
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3182
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3183
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3184
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3185
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3186
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3187
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3188
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3189
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3190
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3191
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3192
SuperHyperNumbers. 3193
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and 3194
neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related 3195
to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research 3196
article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic 3197
SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of 3198
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3199
entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with 3200
ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 2 and issue 1 with pages 3201
16-24. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs 3202
instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3203
results based on initial background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing 3204
Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside 3205
(Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett 3206
(2022), “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [6] by 3207
Henry Garrett (2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3208
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3209
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty 3210
On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward 3211
Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled 3212
Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of 3213
Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” 3214
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The 3215
Cells and Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3216
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) 3217
SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3218
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and 3219
Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed 3220
SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3221
in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the 3222
Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes 3223
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism 3224
of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition 3225
Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3226
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3227
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 3228
Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on 3229
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [15] by Henry 3230
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction 3231
To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And 3232
Beyond ” in Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on 3233
Cancer’s Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” 3234
in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3235
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3236
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3237
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3238
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3239
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3240
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3241
in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3242
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3243
Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3244
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3245
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3246
And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3247
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3248
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3249
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3250
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3251
Treatments” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3252
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3253
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett 3254
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3255
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [169] by Henry 3256
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3257
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3258
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [170] by Henry Garrett 3259
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3260
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3261
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [171] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3262
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3263
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3264
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [172] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3265
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3266
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [175] by 3267
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3268
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3269
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [176] by Henry 3270
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3271
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3272
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [179] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3273
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3274
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [182] by Henry 3275
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3276
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3277
in Ref. [183] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3278
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3279
Ref. [184] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3280
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3281
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [185] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3282
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3283
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [186] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3284
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3285
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [187] by Henry Garrett 3286
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3287
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [198] by Henry 3288
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3289
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3290
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [199] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–199], there 3291
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3292
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3293
at [200–313]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3294
readers, 4190 and 5189 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [314, 315]. 3295
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3296
proposed as book in Ref. [314] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3297
Scholar and has more than 4331 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3298
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3299
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3300
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3301
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3302
proposed as book in Ref. [315] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3303
Scholar and has more than 5327 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3304
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3305
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3306
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3307
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3308
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3309
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3310
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3311
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3312
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–199] 3313
alongside scientific research books at [200–313]. Two popular scientific research books 3314
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4331 and 5327 respectively, on neutrosophic 3315
science is on [314, 315]. 3316
References 3317
1. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3318
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3319
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3320
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3321
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3322
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3323
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3324
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3325
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3326
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3327
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3328
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3329
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3330
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3331
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3332
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3333
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3334
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3335
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. 3336
(https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/neutrosophic-codegree- 3337
and-neutrosophic-degree-alongside-chromatic-numbers-in-the-setting-of-some- 3338
classes-related-to-neut.pdf) 3339
5. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3340
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3341
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3342
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3343
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3344
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3345
6. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3346
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3347
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3348
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3349
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3350
7. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3351
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3353
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3354
8. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3355
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3356
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3357
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3358
9. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3359
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3360
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3361
10. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3362
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3363
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3364
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3365
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3366
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3367
11. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3368
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3369
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3370
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3371
12. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3372
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3373
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3374
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3375
13. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3376
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3377
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3378
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3379
14. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3380
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3381
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3382
15. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3383
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3384
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3385
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3386
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3387
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3388
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3389
17. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3390
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3391
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3392
18. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3393
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3394
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3396
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3400
20. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3401
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3402
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3403
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3404
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3405
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3406
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3407
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3408
22. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3409
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3410
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3411
23. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3412
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3413
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3414
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3415
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3416
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3417
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3418
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3419
25. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3420
SuperHyperGraph By Dominating-Edges As Hyper Dome On Super Eddy”, 3421
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7940830). 3422
26. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Dome Of 3423
Dominating-Edges In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3424
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943578). 3425
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab”, Zenodo 2023, 3427
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595). 3428
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gab By Hyper Gape Of Edge-Gap In 3429
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3430
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923632). 3431
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3433
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3434
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3435
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3436
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3439
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3440
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3441
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3442
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3443
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3444
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3445
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3447
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3448
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3450
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3453
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3456
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3459
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3460
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3462
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3465
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3467
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3468
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3471
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3474
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3477
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3478
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3480
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3483
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3484
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3486
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3489
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3492
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3495
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3498
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3501
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3502
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3504
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3505
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3507
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3508
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3510
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3513
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3516
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3517
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3519
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3522
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3523
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3524
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3526
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3527
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3529
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3530
61. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3531
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3532
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3535
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3538
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3539
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3541
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3542
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3544
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3547
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3550
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3553
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3556
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3559
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3562
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3565
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3568
74. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3570
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3571
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3572
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3574
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3577
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3578
77. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3579
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3580
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3581
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3583
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3586
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3589
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3590
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3592
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3593
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3595
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3596
83. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3597
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3598
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3599
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3601
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3604
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3607
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3608
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3610
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3613
89. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3615
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3617
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3619
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3621
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3622
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3625
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3627
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3628
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3631
95. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3633
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3635
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3637
97. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3639
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3640
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3643
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3644
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3646
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3649
101. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3651
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3653
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3655
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3656
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3658
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3660
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3662
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3664
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3665
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3666
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3667
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3668
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3670
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3671
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3672
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3673
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3676
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3678
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3679
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3682
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3684
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3685
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3688
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3690
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3692
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3694
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3695
116. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3696
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3697
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3700
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3701
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3702
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3703
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3706
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3707
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3708
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3709
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3712
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3713
122. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3714
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3715
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3718
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3719
124. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3720
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3721
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3724
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3725
126. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3726
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3727
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3729
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3730
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3733
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3734
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3735
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3736
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3739
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3740
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3741
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3742
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3745
133. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3747
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3748
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3751
135. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3753
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3754
136. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3756
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3757
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3760
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3763
139. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3765
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3766
140. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3768
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3769
141. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3771
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3772
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3773
142. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3774
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3775
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3776
143. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3777
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3778
144. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3780
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3781
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3782
145. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3783
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3784
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3785
146. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3786
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3787
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3788
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3789
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3792
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3793
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3796
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3797
149. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3798
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3800
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3801
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3804
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3805
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3808
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3809
152. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3810
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3811
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3812
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3813
153. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3814
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3815
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3816
154. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3817
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3818
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3819
155. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3820
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3821
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3822
156. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3823
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3824
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3825
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3826
157. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3827
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3828
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3829
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3830
158. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3831
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3832
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3833
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3834
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3835
159. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3836
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3837
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3838
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3839
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3840
160. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3841
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3842
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3843
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3844
161. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3845
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3846
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3847
162. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3848
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3851
163. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3852
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3853
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3854
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3855
164. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3856
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3857
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3858
165. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3859
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3860
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3861
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3862
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3863
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3864
166. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3865
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3866
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3867
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3868
167. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3869
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3870
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3871
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3872
168. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3873
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3874
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3875
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3876
169. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3877
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3878
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3879
170. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3880
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3881
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3882
171. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3884
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3885
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3886
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3887
172. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3888
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3889
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3890
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3891
173. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3892
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3893
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3894
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3895
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3897
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3898
175. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3899
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3900
176. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3902
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3903
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3904
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3909
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3913
179. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3914
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3915
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3916
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3917
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3920
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3922
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3923
182. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3924
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3925
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3928
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3929
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3931
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3932
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3935
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3936
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3938
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3939
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3942
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3943
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3945
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3946
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3948
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3953
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3954
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3958
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3959
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3962
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3965
194. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3966
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3967
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3968
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3969
195. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3970
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3971
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3972
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3973
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3976
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3977
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3980
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3981
198. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3982
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3983
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3984
199. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3985
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3986
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3987
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3988
200. Henry Garrett, “Collections of Math II”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3989
10.5281/zenodo.7943878). 3990
201. Henry Garrett, “Dominating-Edges In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3991
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943871). 3992
202. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Gap In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3993
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923786). 3994
203. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3995
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7905287). 3996
204. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3997
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904586). 3998
205. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3999
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7874677). 4000
206. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4001
207. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4003
208. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4005
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 4006
209. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4007
210. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4009
211. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4011
212. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4013
213. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4015
214. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4017
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4018
215. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4019
216. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4021
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 4022
217. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4023
218. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4025
219. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4027
220. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4029
221. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4031
222. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4033
223. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4035
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4036
224. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4037
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4038
225. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4039
226. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4041
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4042
227. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4043
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4044
228. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4045
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4046
229. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4047
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4048
230. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4049
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4050
231. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4051
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4052
232. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4053
233. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4055
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4056
234. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4057
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4058
235. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4059
236. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4061
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4062
237. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4063
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4064
238. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4065
239. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4067
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4068
240. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4069
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4070
241. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4071
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4072
242. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4073
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4074
243. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4075
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4076
244. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4077
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4078
245. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4079
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4080
246. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4081
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4082
247. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4083
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4084
248. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4085
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4086
249. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4087
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4088
250. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4089
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4090
251. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4091
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4092
252. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4093
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4094
253. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4095
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4096
254. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4097
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4098
255. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4099
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4100
256. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4101
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4102
257. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4103
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4104
258. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4105
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4106
259. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4107
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4108
260. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4109
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4110
261. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4111
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4112
262. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4113
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4114
263. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4115
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4116
264. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4117
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4118
265. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4119
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4120
266. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4121
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4122
267. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4123
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4124
268. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4125
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4126
269. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4127
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4128
270. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4129
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4130
271. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4131
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4132
272. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4133
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4134
273. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4135
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4136
274. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4137
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4138
275. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4139
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4140
276. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4141
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4142
277. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4143
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4144
278. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4145
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4146
279. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4147
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4148
280. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4149
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4150
281. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4151
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4152
282. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4153
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4154
283. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4155
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4156
284. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4157
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4158
285. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4159
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4160
286. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4161
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4162
287. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4163
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4164
288. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4165
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4166
289. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4167
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4168
290. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4169
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4170
291. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4171
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4172
292. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4173
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4174
293. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4175
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4176
294. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4177
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4178
295. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4179
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4180
296. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4181
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4182
297. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4183
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4184
298. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4185
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4186
299. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4187
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4188
300. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4189
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4190
301. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4191
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4192
302. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4193
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4194
303. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4195
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4196
304. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4197
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4198
305. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4199
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4200
306. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4201
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4202
307. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4203
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4204
308. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4205
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4206
309. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4207
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4208
310. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4209
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4210
311. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4211
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4212
312. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4213
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4214
313. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4215
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4216
314. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4217
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4218
315. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4219
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4220
View publication stats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Matrix-Based As Hyper Mat On Super Matte

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 Matrix-Based As Hyper Mat On Super Matte

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

477 PUBLICATIONS 17,440 CITATIONS

On Combinatorics View project

Featured Articles View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Matrix-Based As Hyper mat 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

SuperHyperMatrix-Based). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 10

Matrix-Based pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 13

e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 14

The incidence matrix forms;

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 15

e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 16

The incidence matrix forms;

and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 17

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 18

v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 19

The adjacency matrix forms;

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 20

v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based criteria holds 21

The adjacency matrix forms;

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

SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 23

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and 24

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatrix-Based). Assume 25

a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a 26

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an 27

Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 28

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and 29

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 30

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 31

SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the 32

consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 33

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based; a 34

Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, 35

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and 36

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 37

SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 38

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 39

Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 40

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatrix-Based; an 41

Extreme SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 42

e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic 43

v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for 44

an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 45

Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S 47

of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 48

Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 50

SuperHyperMatrix-Based SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 51

e-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, Neutrosophic 52

v-SuperHyperMatrix-Based, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperMatrix-Based and C(N SHG) for a 53

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 54

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 55

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 56

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 57

consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 58