New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/371783534
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity
Preprint · June 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8072171
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
502 PUBLICATIONS 21,450 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project
On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 22 June 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 Reverse Dimension Dominating As 3
Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity 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
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating). Let a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10
be a Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E 0 : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb

And ∀Ea , Eb ∈ EN SHG , ∃Ec ∈ E 0 : d(Ea , Ec ) ≤ d(Eb , Ec );
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 16

and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 17
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 18
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 19
∀Va , ∃Vb ∈ V 0 : ∃Ed ∈ EN SHG , Va , Vc ∈ Ed

And ∀Va , Vb ∈ VN SHG , ∃Vc ∈ V 0 : d(Va , Vc ) ≤ d(Vb , Vc );
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 21

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 23
Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 24
v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 25
Dominating. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating). Assume a Neutrosophic 26
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 27
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 28
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 29
Dominating and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 32
maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 33
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 34
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 35
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 36
Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 37
re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 38
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a 39
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 40
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 41
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 42
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 43
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 44
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 45
Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 46
Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 49
Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 50
SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 51
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 52
form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 53
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 54
Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 55
Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 58
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as 59
the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 60
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 61
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 62
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; and the 63
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme 64
V-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 65
maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 69
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 70
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 71
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 72
Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 73
re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 74
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a 75
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 77
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 78
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 80
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 81
Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 85
Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 86
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 87
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 88
form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 89
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 90
Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 91
Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 94
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as 95
the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 96
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 97
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 98
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 99
Dominating; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In 100
this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 101
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 102
Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes 103
further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based 104
on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the 105
whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 106
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 107
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 108
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 109
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 110
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 111
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 112
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 113
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 114
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 115
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 116
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 117
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 118
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 119
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 120
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 121
δ−SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 122
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 123
(Neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 124
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 125
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 126
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 127
is a maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 128
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 129
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 130
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 131
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 132
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 133
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 134
version of a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating . Since there’s more ways to get 135
type-results to make a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating more understandable. For the 136
sake of having Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, there’s a need to 137
“redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating ”. The SuperHyperVertices 138
and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. 139
In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. 140
Assume a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic 141
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The 142
Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to 143
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The 144
Vertices & The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The 145
SuperVertices&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The 146
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum 147
Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of 148
Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m going to introduce the 149
next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperReverse Dimension 150
Dominating . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of previous 151
definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all SuperHyperReverse 152
Dimension Dominating until the SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then it’s officially called a 153
“SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” but otherwise, it isn’t a SuperHyperReverse Dimension 154
Dominating . There are some instances about the clarifications for the main definition 155
titled a “SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating ”. These two examples get more scrutiny 156
and discernment since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of the 157
SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating . For the sake of having 158
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, there’s a need to “redefine” the 159
notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” and a “Neutrosophic 160
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the 161
SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this 162
procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 163
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the 164
intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating are redefined to a 165
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful 166
to define “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get 167
Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 168
more understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 169
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 170
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 171
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 172
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating”, “Neutrosophic 173
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 174
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 175
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” 176
where it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperReverse 177
Dimension Dominating amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a 178
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating .] SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating . A graph is a 179
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 180
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 181
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 182
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 183
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 184
given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 185
amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 186
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 187
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s 188
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these 189
SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 190
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 191
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 192
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 193
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 194
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 195
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 196
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 197
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 198
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 199
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 200
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 201
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 202
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 203
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 204
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 205
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 206
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 207
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 208
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 209
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 210
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 211
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Dimension 212
Dominating, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, 213
SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperReverse Dimension 214
Dominating or the strongest SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in those Neutrosophic 215
SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, called 216
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and the strongest SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 217
called Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, some general results are 218
introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only 219
two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 220
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. There isn’t 221
any formation of any SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating but literarily, it’s the 222
deformation of any SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. It, literarily, deforms and it 223
doesn’t form. A basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 224
theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 225
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 226
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 227
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 228
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 229
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 230
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 231
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 232
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 233
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 234
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 235
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 236
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 237
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 238
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 239
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 240
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 241
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 242
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 243
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 244
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 245
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 246
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 247
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 248
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 249
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 250
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 251
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 252
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 253
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 254
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 255
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 256
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 257
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 258
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 259
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 260
formally called “ SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” in the themes of jargons and 261
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 262
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in 263
the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 264
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 265
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 266
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 267
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 268
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 269
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 270
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 271
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 272
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, SuperHyperStar, 273
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 274
either the optimal SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating or the Neutrosophic 275
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some 276
general results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible 277
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough 278
since it’s essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 279
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperReverse 280
Dimension Dominating but literarily, it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperReverse Dimension 281
Dominating. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 282
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 283
find the “ amount of SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” of either individual of cells or the 284
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 285
of SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups 286
of group of cells? 287
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 288
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 289
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 290
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 291
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 292
Dominating” on “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the 293
research has taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some 294
connections amid this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates 295
us to get some instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of 296
this research. The general results and some results about some connections are some 297
avenues to make key point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more 298
understandable and more clear. 299
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 300
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 301
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 302
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 303
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 304
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 305
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperReverse Dimension 306
Dominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, are figured out in sections 307
“ SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 308
Dominating”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in Reverse Dimension Dominating to 309
make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and 310
Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, 311
corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, 312
titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 313
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 314
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 315
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 316
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 317
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 318
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 319
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 320
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 321
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating”, 322
“Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. 323
There are curious questions about what’s done about the SuperHyperNotions to make 324
sense about excellency of this research and going to figure out the word “best” as the 325
description and adjective for this research as presented in section, “ SuperHyperReverse 326
Dimension Dominating”. The keyword of this research debut in the section “Applications in 327
Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward 328
SuperHyperBipartite as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward 329
SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there 330
are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research 331
in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in 332
featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about 333
what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are 334
included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 335
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 336
Research On the Redeemed Ways 337
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 338
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 339
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.5,p.2), 340
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 341
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 342
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 343
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [1],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 344
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 345
(Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 346
to Ref. [216]. 347
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 348
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 349
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.1,p.1). 350
Let X be a Reverse Dimension Dominating 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 351
+
]− 0, 1 [. 352
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2). 353
Let X be a Reverse Dimension Dominating 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. [1],Definition 354
2.5,p.2). 355
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 356
pair S = (V, E), where 357
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 358
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 359
1, 2, . . . , n); 360
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 361
V; 362
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 363
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 364
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 365
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 366
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 367
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 368
(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 . 369
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 370
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 371
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 372
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 373
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 374
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 375
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 376
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 377
the ii0 th element of the Reverse Dimension Dominating of Neutrosophic 378
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 379
and E are crisp sets. 380
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 381
(Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3). 382
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 383
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 384
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 385
characterized as follow-up items. 386
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 387
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 388
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 389
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 390
HyperEdge; 391
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 392
SuperEdge; 393
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 394
SuperHyperEdge. 395
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 396
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 397
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3). 398
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 399
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 400
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 401
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 402
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 403
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 404
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)). 405
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 406
pair S = (V, E), where 407
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 408
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 409
1, 2, . . . , n); 410
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 411
V; 412
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 413
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 414
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 415
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 416
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 417
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 418
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 419
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 420
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 421
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 422
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 423
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 424
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 425
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 426
the ii0 th element of the Reverse Dimension Dominating of Neutrosophic 427
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 428
and E are crisp sets. 429
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 430
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 432
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 433
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 434
characterized as follow-up items. 435
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 436
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 437
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 438
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 439
HyperEdge; 440
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 441
SuperEdge; 442
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 443
SuperHyperEdge. 444
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 445
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 446
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 447
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 448
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 449
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 450
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 451
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 452
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 453
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 454
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 455
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 456
given SuperHyperEdges; 457
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 458
SuperHyperEdges; 459
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 460
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 461
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 462
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 463
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 464
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 465
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 466
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 467
common SuperVertex. 468
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 469
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 470
of following conditions hold: 471
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 476
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 477
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 478
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 479
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 480
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 481
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 482
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. 483
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 484
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 485
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 486
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 487
SuperHyperPath . 488
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 489
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 491
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 492
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 493
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 494
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 495
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 496
(NSHE)). (Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). 497
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 498
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 499
(ix) Neutrosophic t-Connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 500
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 501
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 502
(x) Neutrosophic i-Connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 503
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 504
(xi) Neutrosophic f-Connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 506
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 507
(xii) Neutrosophic Connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 509
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 510
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 511
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 512
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 513
Dimension Dominating). 514
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 516
either V 0 or E 0 is called 517
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following 518
expression is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 519
criteria holds 520

(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following 521
expression is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 522
criteria holds 523

and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 524
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following 525
expression is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 526
criteria holds 527

(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following 528
expression is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 529
criteria holds 530

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 531
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 532
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 533
re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 534
Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 535
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating). 536
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic 539
e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 540
Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic 541
rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 542
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 543
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 544
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 545
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 546
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 547
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 548
Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) 551
for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 552
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 553
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 554
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 555
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 556
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial 557
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 558
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 561
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 562
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 563
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 564
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 566
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 567
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 568
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 569
v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse 571
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 572
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 573
Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 574
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; and the Neutrosophic power is 578
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 579
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 580
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 584
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 585
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 586
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 588
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 589
for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 593
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 594
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 595
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 596
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 597
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 598
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 602
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 603
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 604
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 605
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 606
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension 607
Dominating; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 608
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 609
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 613
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 614
Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 615
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; and the 619
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 620
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating). 621
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 622
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints
(i) an δ−SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is a Neutrosophic kind of 623
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating such that either of the following 624
expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of 625
s∈S: 626
|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 627
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 628
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is a Neutrosophic 629
kind of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating such that either of the 630
following Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 631
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 632
|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. 633
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 634
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 635
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, there’s a 636
need to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 637
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 638
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 639
assign to the values. 640
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 641
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 642
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 643
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 644
understandable. 645
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 646
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 647
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 648
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 649
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 650
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 651
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 652
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 653

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 654
. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic

Dimension Dominating 655
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating more Neutrosophicly understandable. 656
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, there’s a 657
need to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 658
Dominating”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the 659
labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the 660
position of labels to assign to the values. 661
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. It’s redefined a 662
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the Table (3) holds. 663
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As Reverse Dimension Dominating 664
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 665
Forms 666
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 667
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V 669
is called Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is 670
called Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic 671
probability of A. 672
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 673
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is 675
called Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called 676
Neutrosophic s-independent criteria 677
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 678
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 679
criteria 680
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 681
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Any k-function Reverse Dimension Dominating 683
like E is called Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Reverse Dimension 684
Dominating like E is called Neutrosophic Variable. 685
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 686
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 687
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 689
number is called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 690
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 691
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 692
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. A Neutrosophic number is called 694
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 695
Crossing criteria 696
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 697
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let m and n 698
propose special Reverse Dimension Dominating. Then with m ≥ 4n, 699
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 700
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 701
Neutrosophic independently with probability Reverse Dimension Dominating p := 4n/m, and set 702
H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 703
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: 704
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ 3
= 3 = m n .
p (4n/m) 64
705
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 706
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let P be a 707
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of 708
SuperHyperLines
√ in the plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 709
1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 710
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 711
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points 712
on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 713
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 714
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 715
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 716
again l < 32n2 /k 3 . 717
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let P be a 719
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P 720
at unit SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 721
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 722
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 723
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 724
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 725
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
726
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 727
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on 728
the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 729
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 730
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 731
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 732
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 733
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 734
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 735
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 736
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 737
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let X be a 738
nonnegative Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 739
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. 740
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 741
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let Xn be a 742
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating 743
(Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 744
Proof. 745
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. A special 747
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 748
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. A special 750
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of 751
k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 752
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 753
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 754
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 755
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 756
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 757
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 758
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 759
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: 760
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 761
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 762
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 763
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 764
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 765
stability number at most k. 766
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 767
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 769
number is called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called 770
Neutrosophic Variance criteria 771
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let X be a 773
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 774
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let X be a Neutrosophic 776
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 777
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
778
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let Xn be a 780
Neutrosophic Variable in a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 781
Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 782
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Set X := Xn and 784
t := |Ex(Xn )| in Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that 785
E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| 786
when Xn = 0. 787
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . 789
For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k 790
for which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 791
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 792
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. As in the proof of related 794
Theorem, the result is straightforward. 795
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 797
and let f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 798
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 799
or 800
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 801
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. The latter is 803
straightforward. 804
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 805
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let P be a monotone property of 807
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 808
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 809
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 810
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 811
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 812
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 814
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 815
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 816
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. Let F be a 818
nonempty balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 819
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 820
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 821
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Dimension Dominating. The latter is 823
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 825
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 826
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 827
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is 828
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 829
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 830
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 831
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 832
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 833
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 834
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 835
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 836
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating =

{}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Reverse Dimension Dominating =
{}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Reverse Dimension Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
837
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 840
SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms 841
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic 842
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is 843
Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it 844
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is 845
excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 846

{}.
= 0z 0 .
{}.
= 0z 0 .
847
Neutrosophicly straightforward. 850

{}.
= 0z 0 .
{}.
= 0z 0 .
851




{}.
= 0z 0 .
{}.
= 0z 0 .
855

{EN SHG − {Ei }}.
= z 6−c .
{VN SHG − {Vi }}.
= z 7−c .
859


{Ei }22
i=12 .
= z 3−a .
{Vi , V21 }10
i=1 .
= z 3−a .
863

{EN SHG − {Ei }}.
= z 6−c .
{VN SHG − {Vi }}.
= z 7−c .
867




{E1 , E2 }.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V11 }}.
= z 3−a .
871

{E3i+1 , E23 }3i=0 .
= z 3−a .
{V3i+1 , V11 }3i=0 .
= z 3−a .
875


{EN SHG − {E1 , E5 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V11 }}.
= z 3−a .
879

{EN SHG − {E1 , E6 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V5 }}.
= z 3−a .
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)
883

{EN SHG − {E1 , E2 }}.
= z 2−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V5 }}.
= z 5−a .
887

(16.3)

{EN SHG − {E6 , E9 }}.
= z 2−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V5 }}.
= z 3−a .
891

{E2 }.
= z 3−a .
{V1 }.
= z 5−a .
895

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 3−a .
{V3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 3−a .
899

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 }.
= z 2−a .
903

(16.3)

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 , V27 }.
= z 2−a .
907

{E3i+2 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 , V27 }.
= z 2−a .
911

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E3i+1 }3i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2i+1 }5i=0 .
= z 2−a .
915

{EN SHG − {E1 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , {U2 , V2 , W2 }}.
= z 3−a .

(16.3)
919

{E2 }.
= z |1−a| .
{V1 }.
= z |5−a| .
923

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E2i+3 }1i=0 .
= z 1−a .
{V1 , V10 , V6 }.
= z 4−a .
927
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 928
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 929
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating if for any of them, and any of other 930
corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic 931
SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no 932
Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any 933
amount of them. 934
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 935
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 936
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 937
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating minus all Neutrosophic 938
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 939
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 940
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating, 941
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 942
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-Reverse Dimension Dominating is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension 943
Dominating is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 944
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of 945
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 946
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 947
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating in 948
some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 949
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 950
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. 951
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-Reverse Dimension Dominating with the least Neutrosophic 952
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 953
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 954
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 955
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseDimensionDominating

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseDimensionDominating = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Reverse Dimension Dominating. In other words, the least cardinality, 956
the lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Reverse Dimension 957
Dominating is the cardinality of 958

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseDimensionDominating = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP 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-Reverse Dimension
Dominating 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-Reverse Dimension Dominating. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-Reverse Dimension
Dominating. 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 959
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 960
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 961
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 962
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 963
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 964
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 965
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 966
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-Reverse
Dimension Dominating. 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-Reverse Dimension
Dominating has the Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating has the Neutrosophic cardinality at least a

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}.
This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-Reverse Dimension Dominating” 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-Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-Reverse Dimension Dominating for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as 967
used Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case 968
and the common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific 969
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are 970
Neutrosophic free-quasi-triangle. 971
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-Reverse Dimension Dominating. Those Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Reverse Dimension
Dominating. 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-Reverse Dimension

Dominating is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension
Dominating 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-Reverse Dimension

E
Dominating. Let Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices belong to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) .

Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 972
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating =

E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
973
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating =

Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic
intended SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating,
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-Reverse Dimension Dominating is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse 974
Dimension Dominating is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 975
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 976
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 977
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 978
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating 979
in some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 980
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 981
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension 982
Dominating. 983
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 984
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 985
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 986
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 987
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 988
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 989
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 990
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 991
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 992
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 993
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 994
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating where 995
the Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 996
literarily, a Neutrosophic embedded R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. The SuperHyperNotions 997
of embedded SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, 998
these types of SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum 999
SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the embedded setting is elected such that those 1000
SuperHyperSets have the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re 1001
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic 1002
SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded 1003
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. The interior types of the Neutrosophic 1004
SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the Neutrosophic number of 1005
SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior Neutrosophic 1006
SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more formal, the 1007
perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any distinct 1008
types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension 1009
Dominating. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one 1010
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the 1011
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In 1012
the embedded Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating, there’s the usage of exterior 1013
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than 1014
outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One 1015
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic 1016
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement 1017
has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic 1018
R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. The Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating with the exclusion 1019
of the exclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic 1020
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating with 1021
the inclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic 1022
SuperHyperEdge, is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. To sum them up, in 1023
a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only 1024
one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum 1025
possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given 1026
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating minus all Neutrosophic 1027
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only 1028
an unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 1029
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating, 1030
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1031
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating has two titles. a 1032
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating and its corresponded quasi-maximum 1033
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 1034
any Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating with 1035
that quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the 1036
embedded Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1037
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1038
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominatings for all Neutrosophic 1039
numbers less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 1040
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of 1041
the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating, again and more in the operations of 1042
collecting all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominatings acted on the all possible 1043
used formations of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic 1044
number. This Neutrosophic number is 1045
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Reverse Dimension 1046
Dominatings. Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and 1047
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1048
SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating. Then 1049
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating is 1050
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1051
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1052
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating. 1053
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating =

{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 1054
Reverse Dimension Dominating poses the upcoming expressions. 1055

{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1056

= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1057


To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1058
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class

1059

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

1060


1061


Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1062
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1063
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1064
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1065
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Dimension Dominating” but, precisely, it’s the 1066
generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Dimension Dominating” since “Neutrosophic 1067
Quasi-Reverse Dimension Dominating” happens “Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating” in a 1068
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but 1069
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension 1070
Dominating” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily 1071
background since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic 1072
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, 1073
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Dimension Dominating”, 1074
and “Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating” are up. 1075
Thus, let 1076
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1077
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1078
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating and the new terms 1079
are up. 1080
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1081

{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1082

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1083

And with go back to initial structure, 1084
GNeutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class

1085

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1086


1087


Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1088
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Dimension 1089
Dominating if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1090
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1091
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1092
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1093
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1094
are coming up. 1095
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension
Dominating.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension

. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Dominating
Is an Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1096
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1097
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1098
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1099
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1100
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating 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 Reverse Dimension
Dominating is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-Reverse
Dimension Dominating is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1101
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1103
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1104
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating and it’s an 1105
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating. Since it’s 1106
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 Reverse Dimension
Dominating. There isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the
intended Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Reverse Dimension Dominating, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1107
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1108
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1109
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1110
“Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating” 1111
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1112
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating, 1113
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-Reverse Dimension Dominating amid
those obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Reverse
Dimension Dominating, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1114
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. In other words, the least cardinality, the
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating is the
cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1115
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1116
quasi-R-Reverse Dimension Dominating if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 1117
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 1118
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 1119
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1120
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1121
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1122
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1123
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1124
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1125
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1126
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 1127
Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1128
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1129
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1130
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1131
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1132
R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. Since it doesn’t have 1133
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1135
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1136
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1137
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1138
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic 1139
procedure such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some 1140
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic 1141
SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic 1142
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its 1143
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the 1144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. 1145
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic 1146
SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. 1147
Thus the obvious Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating, VESHE is up. The obvious 1148
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating, 1149
VESHE , is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic 1150
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled 1151
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1152
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1153
SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1154
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1155
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1156
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1157
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1158
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Dimension Dominating only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1159
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1160
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1161
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1162
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1163
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1164
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1165
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Reverse Dimension Dominating, is up. There’s neither empty 1166
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1167
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1168
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating. The 1169
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1170

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseDimensionDominating = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension 1171
Dominating. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1172
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1173

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1174
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1175
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1177
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1178
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1179
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1180
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension 1181
Dominating is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1182
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only 1183
two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1184
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1185

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 1186
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1187
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic 1188
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1189

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 Reverse 1190
. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1192

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1193
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1194
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1195
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic 1196
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating and it’s an 1197
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating. Since it’s 1198
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1200
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1201
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1202
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1203
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1204

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

Reverse Dimension Dominating 1205

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 Reverse 1206
, not:

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1208

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 1209
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1210
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1211
“Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating ” 1212
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1213
Neutrosophic Reverse Dimension Dominating , 1214
is only and only 1215

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1216
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1217
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1218
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1219
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1220
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1221
Then 1222

|E |
{E3i+2 }i=0ESHP .
| min |E | |Ei |
{E3i+2 } ESHP
=z i=0 .
EXT ERN AL |E |
{V2i+2 }i=0ESHP .
| min |E | |Vi |
{V EXT ERN AL } ESHP
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1223
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1224
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Example (16.5)
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1225
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1226
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 1227
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1228
The latter is straightforward. 1229
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1230
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1231
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1232
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1233
Then 1234

|E |
{E3i+2 }i=0ESHP .
| min |E | |Ei |
{E3i+2 } ESHP
=z i=0 .
EXT ERN AL |E |
{V2i+2 }i=0ESHP .
| min |E | |Vi |
{V EXT ERN AL } ESHP
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1235
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1236
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 1237
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1238

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1242
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1243
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1244
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1246
Then 1247

{EN SHG − {E1 , E2 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {ViIN T ERN AL , CEN T ER}}.
= z 3−a .
Proof. Let 1248
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

1249
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1250
There’s a new way to redefine as 1251

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1255
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1256
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1257
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1258
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1259
Dominating. 1260
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1261
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1262

{EN SHG − {EPi , EPj }i6=j }.
= z b−a .
{VN SHG − {VPi , VPj }i6=j }.
= z b−a .
Proof. Let 1263
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
1264
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 1265
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1266

The latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1269
Dominating. Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1270
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating could be applied. There are only two 1271
SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the 1272
representative in the 1273
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1274
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1275
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1276
solution 1277
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1279
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1280
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1281
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1282
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1283
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1284
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1285
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1286

{EN SHG − {EPi , EPj }i6=j }.
= z b−a .
{VN SHG − {VPi , VPj }i6=j }.
= z b−a .
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Example
(16.11)
Proof. Let 1287
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
1288
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 1290

The latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1293
Dominating. Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1294
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1295
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Example (16.13)
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1296
the 1297
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1298
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1299
solution 1301
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1303
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1304
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1305
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1306
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1307
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1308
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1309
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1310
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1311

|E |
{E3i+2 }i=0ESHP ∪ E ∗ .
| min |E | |Ei |
{E3i+2 } ESHP ∪E ∗
=z i=0 .
|E |
EXT ERN AL
{V2i+2 }i=0ESHP ∪ V ∗ .
| min |E | |Vi |
{V EXT ERN AL } ESHP ∪V ∗
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1312
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1313
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1315

The latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1318
Dominating. Thus the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1319
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating could be applied. The unique embedded 1320
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating proposes some longest SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1321
Dominating excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1322
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1324
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1325
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1326
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1327
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1329
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1330
For the SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1331
Dominating, and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, some general results 1332
are introduced. 1333
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in the Neutrosophic
Example (16.15)
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is 1334
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1335
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. Then 1336
N eutrosophic SuperHyperReverseDimensionDominating =
{theSuperHyperReverseDimensionDominatingof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperReverseDimensionDominating
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperReverseDimensionDominating. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1337
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1338
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1339
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1340
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and 1341
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating coincide. 1342
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1344
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if and only if it’s a SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1345
Dominating. 1346
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1348
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1349
Dominating. 1350
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1351
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1352
Dominating is its SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and reversely. 1353
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1354
, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite,

Dominating 1355
SuperHyperWheel) on the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic 1356
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is its SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and reversely. 1357
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1358
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse 1359
Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined. 1360
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1361
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1362
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined. 1363

Dominating 1365
SuperHyperWheel). Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating isn’t 1366
well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined. 1367
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1368
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1369
Dominating is well-defined. 1370
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1371
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is well-defined if and only if its 1372
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is well-defined. 1373

Dominating 1375
SuperHyperWheel). Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is well-defined 1376
if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating is well-defined. 1377
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1378
is 1379
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1380
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1381
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1382
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1383
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1384
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1385
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1386
∅ is 1387
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1388
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1389
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1390
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1391
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1392
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1393
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1394
independent SuperHyperSet is 1395
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1396
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1397
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1398
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1399
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1400
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1401
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1402
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating/SuperHyperPath. Then V 1403
is a maximal 1404
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1405
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1406
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1407
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1408
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1409
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1410
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1411
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1412
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1413
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1414
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1415
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1416
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1417
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1418
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1419
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1420
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1422
number of 1423
(i) : the SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1424
(ii) : the SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1425
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1426
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1427
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1428
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1429
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1430
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1431
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1433
(i) : the dual SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1434
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1435
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1436
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1437
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1438
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1439
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1440
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1443
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1444
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1445
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1446
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1450
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1451
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1452
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1455
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1456
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1457
is a 1458
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1462
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1463
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1464
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1467
number of 1468
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1472
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1473
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1474
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1475
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1476
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1477
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1479
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1480
(iv) : SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1484
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1485
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1486
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1487
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1488
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1489
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1490
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1491
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1495
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1497
Dominating. 1498
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1500
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1501
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1505
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1506
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1507
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1509
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1511
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1512
of a dual 1513
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1517
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1518
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1519
Dominating. 1520
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1522
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1523
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1524
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1530
Dominating. 1531
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1532
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1533
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1534
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1535
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1536
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1537
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then 1538
∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1539
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1540
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1541
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1542
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then 1543
(i) S is SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating set; 1544
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1545
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1546
Then 1547
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1548
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1549
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1550
which is connected. Then 1551
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1552
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1553
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1554
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1555
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1556
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1557
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1558
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1559
a dual SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1560
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1561
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1562
Dominating; 1563
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1564
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1565
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1566
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1567
dual SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1568
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1569
Then 1570
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1571
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1573
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1574
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1575
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1576
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1578
Then 1579
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1580
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1582
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1583
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1584
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1586
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1587
(ii) Γ = 1; 1588
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1589
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1590
Dominating. 1591
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1592
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1593
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1594
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1595
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1596
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1597
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1598
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1599
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1600
Dimension Dominating; 1601
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1602
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1603
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1604
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1606
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1607
Dimension Dominating; 1608
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1609

bnc ; 1610
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1611
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1613
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1614
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1615
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating for N SHF; 1616
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1617
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1618
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1619
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E). 1620
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1621
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1622
SuperHyperSet. Then 1623
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1624
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating for N SHF; 1625
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1626
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
for N SHF : (V, E); 1627
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperReverse 1628
Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E). 1629
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1630
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1631
SuperHyperSet. Then 1632
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1633
Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E); 1634
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1635

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1636
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=12
are only dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1637
Dominating for N SHF : (V, E). 1638
Then following statements hold; 1640
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1641
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then S is an 1642
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1643
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1644
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then S is a dual 1645
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1646
Then following statements hold; 1648
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1649
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then S is an 1650
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1651
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1652
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, then S is a dual 1653
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1654
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1655
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1656
statements hold; 1657
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1658
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1659
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1660
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1662
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1664
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1665
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1666
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1667
statements hold; 1668
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1669
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1671
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1673
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1675
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1676
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1678
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1679
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1680
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1682
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1684
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1687
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1689
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1690
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c
+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1691
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1693
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1695
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; 1696
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1698
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperReverse 1700
Dimension Dominating. Then following statements hold; 1701
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1702
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1704
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1706
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1709
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperReverse 1711
Dimension Dominating. Then following statements hold; 1712
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1713
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1715
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1717
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. 1720
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1721
Neutrosophic Recognition 1722
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1723
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1724
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1725
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1726
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1727
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1728
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1729
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1730
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1731
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1732
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1733
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1734
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1735
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1736
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1737
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1738
happened and what’s done. 1739
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

sophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1740
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1741
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1742
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1743
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 1744
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, 1745
SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 1746
Dimension Dominating or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating in those 1747
Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1748
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1749
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1750
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1751
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1752
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1753
featured. 1754
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1755
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1756
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1757
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1758
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1759
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 SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1761
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1762
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1763
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1764
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1765
Neutrosophic featured. 1766
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1767
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1768
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1769
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1770
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1771
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1773
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1774
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1775
The SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 1776
Dimension Dominating are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1777
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1778
recognitions? 1779
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperReverse Dimension 1780
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating?

Dominating 1781
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1782
compute them? 1783
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1784
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating? 1785
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and the Neutrosophic 1786
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1787
they’re based on SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, are there else? 1788
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1789
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1790
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1791
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1792
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1793
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1794
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1795
highlighted. 1796
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1797
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1798
SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. For that sake in the second definition, the main 1799
definition of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the 1800
alphabets. Based on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the 1801
new SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, finds the 1802
convenient background to implement some results based on that. Some 1803
SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this 1804
research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to 1805
recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To 1806
formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 1807
the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general 1808
results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and the 1809
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating. The clarifications, instances and 1810
literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature 1811
reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the results. The 1812
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on 1813
the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this research. 1814
Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and 1815
embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1816
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1817
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1818
called “ SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1819
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1820
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1821
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1822
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1823
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1824
Forms 1825
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1826
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1830
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1831
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1832
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1833
|Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1834
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1835
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1836
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1837
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1838
|Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1839
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1840
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1841
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1842
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1843
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1846
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1848
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1849
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1851
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1853
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1854
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1857
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1858
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1861
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1862
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1863
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1864
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1865
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1870
Extreme coefficient; 1871
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1872
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1873
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1875
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1876
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1877
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1878
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 1879
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1881
Neutrosophic coefficient; 1882
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1883
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1890
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1891
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1895
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1898
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1899
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1904
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 1905
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1907
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1909
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1915
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1918
Neutrosophic coefficient. 1919
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1923
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1924
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1925
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1926
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1927
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1928
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1929
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1930
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 1933
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1934
SuperHyperDuality. 1939


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 2002
ESHP : (V, E). Then 2003
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 2004
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 2008
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 2012
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 2013
ESHC : (V, E). Then 2014
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 2015
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2026
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 2027
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2037
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 2040
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 2045
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2046
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2047
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2048
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2049
solution 2052
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2059

= {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 2062
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2063

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2069
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2074
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2082
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 2084
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 2085
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 2086
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2087

∃!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 2092
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2093
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2100
Forms 2102
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2103
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2107
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2108
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2109
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2110
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2112
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2113
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2114
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2115
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2117
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2118
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2119
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2120
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2123
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2124
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2125
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2126
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2127
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2130
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2131
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2133
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2138
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2139
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2140
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2141
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2142
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2147
coefficient; 2148
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2149
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 2152
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 2153
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2154
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2155
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2158
coefficient; 2159
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2160
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2163
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2164
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2165
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2167
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2168
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2175
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2176
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2184
coefficient; 2185
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2186
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2192
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2195
coefficient. 2196
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2200
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2201
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2202
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2203
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2204
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2205
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 2206
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 2207
SuperHyperJoin. 2208
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 2282
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2286
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2290

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

.
Proof. Let 2293
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2304
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 2305

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2315
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 2318
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 2323
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2324
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2325
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2327
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2328
solution 2330
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2337

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

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2345
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2346
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2347
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2352
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2360

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

.
Proof. Let 2363
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2364

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2368
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2369
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2370
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2371
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2378
Forms 2380
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2381
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2385
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2386
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2387
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2388
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2390
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2391
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2392
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2393
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2395
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2396
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2397
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2398
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2401
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2403
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2406
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2408
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2409
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2416
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2417
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2418
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2419
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2425
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2427
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2428
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2433
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2436
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2438
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2445
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2446
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2453
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2454
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2462
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2464
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2470
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2473
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2478
SuperHyperPerfect. 2486
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 2560
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2564
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2568
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 2571
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2582
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2583

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2593
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 2596
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 2601
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2602
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2603
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2604
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2605
solution 2608
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2615

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 2618
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2619

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2623
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2624
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2625
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2630
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2638
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2641

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2642

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2646
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2647
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2648
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2649
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2656
Forms 2658
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2659
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2663
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2664
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2665
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2666
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2668
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2669
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2670
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2671
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2673
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2674
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2675
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2676
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2679
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2681
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2686
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2687
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2689
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2694
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2695
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2696
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2703
coefficient; 2704
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2705
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2711
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2714
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2716
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2721
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2723
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2724
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2731
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2732
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2740
coefficient; 2741
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2742
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2748
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2751
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2756
SuperHyperTotal. 2764
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 2838
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2842
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2846
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 2849
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 2860
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 2861
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2871
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 2874
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2879
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2880
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2883
solution 2886
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2893

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 2896
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2897

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2901
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2902
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2908
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2916
∗
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 2919
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2920

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2924
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2925
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2926
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2927
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2934
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2935
Forms 2936
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2937
SuperHyperConnected). 2938
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2942
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2943
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2944
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2945
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2946
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2947
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2949
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2950
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2951
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2952
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2953
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2954
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2956
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2957
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2958
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2959
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2962
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2964
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2965
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2966
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2967
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2969
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2970
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2973
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2977
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2978
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2979
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2980
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2981
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2982
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2983
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2984
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2985
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2986
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2987
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2988
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2989
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2990
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2991
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2992
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2993
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2994
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2997
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2998
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2999
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 3002
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 3003
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 3004
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 3005
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 3006
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 3007
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 3010
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 3014
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3015
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 3018
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 3019
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 3020
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 3021
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 3022
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 3024
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3026
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3029
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 3030
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 3031
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3032
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3035
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3036
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3040
SuperHyperConnected. 3048
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 3122
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 3126
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3130
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 3133
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 3144
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 3145
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3155
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 3158
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3163
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3164
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3167
solution 3170
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3177
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 3180
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3185
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3186
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3192
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3200
∗
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 3203
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3205

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3208
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3209
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3210
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3211
17 Background 3219
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3220
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3221
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “New Ideas In Recognition of 3222
Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot” in Ref. [1] 3223
by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3224
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms with 3225
introducing used neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published 3226
in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Current Trends in Mass Communication 3227
(CTMC)” with ISO abbreviation “Curr Trends Mass Comm” in volume 2 and issue 1 3228
with pages 32-55. 3229
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3230
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3231
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3232
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3233
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3234
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3235
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3236
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3237
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3238
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3239
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3240
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3241
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3242
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3243
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3244
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3245
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3246
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3247
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3248
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3249
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3250
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3251
SuperHyperNumbers. 3252
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3253
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3254
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett 3255
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3256
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3257
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3258
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3259
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3260
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3261
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3262
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3263
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and 3264
groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and neutrosophic degree 3265
alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related to neutrosophic 3266
hypergraphs” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel 3267
approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 3268
based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic 3269
SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal 3270
of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with ISO abbreviation “J 3271
Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 2 and issue 1 with pages 16-24. The research 3272
article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic 3273
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3274
background. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic 3275
hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward 3276
independent results based on initial background. In some articles are titled “0039 — 3277
Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring 3278
alongside (Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [6] by 3279
Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” 3280
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme 3281
of Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3282
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty 3283
On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward 3284
Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled 3285
Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of 3286
Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” 3287
in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The 3288
Cells and Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3289
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) 3290
SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3291
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and 3292
Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed 3293
SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3294
in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the 3295
Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes 3296
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism 3297
of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition 3298
Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3299
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3300
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 3301
Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on 3302
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [16] by Henry 3303
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction 3304
To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And 3305
Beyond ” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on 3306
Cancer’s Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” 3307
in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3308
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3309
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3310
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3311
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett 3312
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3313
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3314
in Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3315
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3316
Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3317
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3318
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3319
And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3320
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3321
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3322
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3323
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3324
Treatments” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3325
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3326
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [25] by Henry Garrett 3327
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3328
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [186] by Henry 3329
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3330
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3331
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [187] by Henry Garrett 3332
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3333
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3334
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [188] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3335
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3336
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3337
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [189] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3338
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3339
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [192] by 3340
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3341
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3342
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [193] by Henry 3343
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3344
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3345
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [196] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3346
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3347
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [199] by Henry 3348
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3349
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3350
in Ref. [200] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3351
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3352
Ref. [201] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3353
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3354
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [202] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3355
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3356
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [203] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3357
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3358
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [204] by Henry Garrett 3359
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3360
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [215] by Henry 3361
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3362
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3363
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [216] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [?, 4–216], there 3364
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3365
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3366
at [217–338]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3367
readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [339, 340]. 3368
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3369
proposed as book in Ref. [339] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3370
Scholar and has more than 4728 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3371
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3372
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3373
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3374
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3375
proposed as book in Ref. [340] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3376
Scholar and has more than 5721 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3377
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3378
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3379
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3380
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3381
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3382
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3383
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3384
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3385
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [?, 4–216] 3386
alongside scientific research books at [217–338]. Two popular scientific research books 3387
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic 3388
science is on [339, 340]. 3389
References 3390
1. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3391
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Curr Trends Mass Comm 3392
2(1) (2023) 32-55. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/new- 3393
ideas-in-recognition-of-cancer-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-as-hyper- 3394
tool-on-super-toot.pdf) 3395
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3396
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3397
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3398
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3399
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3400
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3401
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3402
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3403
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3404
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3405
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3406
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3407
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3408
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3409
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. (doi: 3410
10.33140/JCTCSR.02.01.04) 3411
5. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3412
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3413
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3414
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3415
6. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3416
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3417
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3418
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3419
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3420
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3421
7. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3422
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3423
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3424
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3425
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3426
8. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3427
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3428
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3429
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3430
9. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3431
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3432
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3433
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3434
10. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3435
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3436
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3437
11. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3438
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3439
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3440
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3441
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3442
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3443
12. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3444
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3445
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3446
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3447
13. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3448
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3449
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3450
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3451
14. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3452
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3453
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3454
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3455
15. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3456
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3457
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3458
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3459
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3460
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3461
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3462
17. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3463
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3464
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3465
18. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3466
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3467
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3468
19. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3469
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3470
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3472
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3476
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3477
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3478
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3479
22. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3480
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3481
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3482
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3483
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3484
23. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3485
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3486
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3487
24. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3488
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3489
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3490
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3491
25. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3492
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3493
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3494
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3495
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3497
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8067384). 3498
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Equal 3499
Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3500
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8067409). 3501
SuperHyperGraph By Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3503
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8061927). 3504
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Dimension 3505
Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3506
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8062016). 3507
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3509
Super Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8057696). 3510
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse 3511
Connective Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3512
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3515
Super Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8052893). 3516
33. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Equal 3517
Connective Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3518
SuperHyperGraph By Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On Super 3521
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8051346). 3522
35. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Connective 3523
SuperHyperGraph By United Dominating As Hyper Ultra On Super Units”, 3527
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Units By Hyper Ultra Of United 3529
SuperHyperGraph By Zero Forcing As Hyper ford On Super forceps”, Zenodo 3533
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8017246). 3534
39. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super forceps By Hyper ford Of Zero Forcing In 3535
Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3536
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020128). 3537
SuperHyperGraph By Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super matte”, Zenodo 3539
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978571). 3540
41. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super mat By Hyper matte Of Matrix-Based In 3541
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3542
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978857). 3543
SuperHyperGraph By Dominating-Edges As Hyper Dome On Super Eddy”, 3545
43. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Dome Of 3547
Dominating-Edges In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3548
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab”, Zenodo 2023, 3551
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595). 3552
45. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gab By Hyper Gape Of Edge-Gap In 3553
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923632). 3555
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3557
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3558
47. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3559
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3560
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3563
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3564
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3565
49. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3566
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3567
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3568
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3569
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3571
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3572
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3574
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3577
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3580
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3583
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3584
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3586
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3589
57. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3591
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3592
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3595
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3598
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3601
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3602
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3604
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3607
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3608
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3610
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3613
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3616
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3619
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3622
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3625
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3626
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3628
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3629
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3631
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3632
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3634
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3637
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3640
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3641
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3643
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3646
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3647
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3648
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3650
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3651
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3653
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3654
78. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3655
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3656
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3659
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3662
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3663
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3665
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3666
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3668
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3671
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3674
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3677
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3680
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3683
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3686
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3689
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3692
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3694
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3695
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3696
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3698
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3701
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3702
94. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3703
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3705
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3707
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3710
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3713
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3714
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3716
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3717
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3719
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3720
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3721
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3722
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3723
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3725
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3728
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3731
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3732
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3734
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3737
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3739
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3741
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3743
108. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3745
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3746
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3749
110. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3751
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3752
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3755
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3757
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3759
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3761
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3763
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3764
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3767
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3768
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3770
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3773
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3775
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3777
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3779
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3780
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3782
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3784
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3786
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3788
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3789
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3790
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3791
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3792
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3794
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3795
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3796
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3797
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3800
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3802
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3803
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3806
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3808
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3809
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3812
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3814
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3816
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3818
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3819
133. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3820
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3821
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3824
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3825
135. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3826
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3827
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3830
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3831
137. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3832
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3833
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3836
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3837
139. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3838
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3839
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3842
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3843
141. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3844
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3845
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3848
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3849
143. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3850
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3851
144. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3853
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3854
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3857
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3858
146. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3859
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3860
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3863
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3864
148. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3865
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3866
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3869
150. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3871
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3872
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3875
152. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3877
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3878
153. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3880
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3881
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3884
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3887
156. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3889
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3890
157. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3892
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3893
158. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3895
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3896
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3897
159. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3898
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3899
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3900
160. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3901
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3902
161. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3904
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3905
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3906
162. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3907
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3908
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3909
163. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3910
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3911
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3912
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3913
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3916
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3917
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3920
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3921
166. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3922
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3924
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3925
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3928
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3929
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3932
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3933
169. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3934
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3935
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3936
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3937
170. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3938
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3939
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3940
171. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3941
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3942
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3943
172. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3944
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3945
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3946
173. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3947
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3948
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3949
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3950
174. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3951
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3952
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3953
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3954
175. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3955
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3956
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3957
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3958
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3959
176. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3960
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3961
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3962
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3963
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3964
177. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3965
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3966
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3967
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3968
178. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3969
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3970
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3971
179. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3972
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3973
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3975
180. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3976
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3977
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3978
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3979
181. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3980
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3981
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3982
182. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3983
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3984
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3985
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3986
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3987
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3988
183. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3989
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3990
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3991
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3992
184. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3993
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3994
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3995
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3996
185. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3997
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3998
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3999
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 4000
186. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 4001
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 4002
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 4003
187. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 4004
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 4005
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 4006
188. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4008
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4009
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4010
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4011
189. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 4012
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 4013
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 4014
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 4015
190. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4016
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4017
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4018
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4019
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4021
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4022
192. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 4023
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 4024
193. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 4026
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 4027
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 4028
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4033
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 4037
196. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 4038
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 4039
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 4040
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 4041
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 4044
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4046
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 4047
199. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 4048
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 4049
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 4052
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 4053
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4055
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 4056
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4059
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 4060
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4062
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 4063
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4066
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 4067
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 4069
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 4070
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 4072
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 4077
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 4078
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 4082
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 4083
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 4086
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 4089
211. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4090
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4091
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 4092
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 4093
212. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4094
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4095
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4096
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 4097
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 4100
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 4101
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4104
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 4105
215. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 4106
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 4107
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 4108
216. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 4109
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 4110
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4111
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 4112
217. Henry Garrett, “Equal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4113
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8067469). 4114
218. Henry Garrett, “Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4115
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8062076). 4116
219. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4117
220. Henry Garrett, “Equal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4119
221. Henry Garrett, “Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4121
222. Henry Garrett, “United Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4123
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8027488). 4124
223. Henry Garrett, “Zero Forcing In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4125
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020181). 4126
224. Henry Garrett, “Matrix-Based In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4127
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978921). 4128
225. Henry Garrett, “Collections of Math II”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4129
10.5281/zenodo.7943878). 4130
226. Henry Garrett, “Dominating-Edges In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4131
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943871). 4132
227. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Gap In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4133
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923786). 4134
228. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4135
229. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4137
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904586). 4138
230. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4139
231. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4141
232. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4143
233. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4145
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 4146
234. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4147
235. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4149
236. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4151
237. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4153
238. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4155
239. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4157
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4158
240. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4159
241. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4161
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 4162
242. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4163
243. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4165
244. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4167
245. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4169
246. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4171
247. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4173
248. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4175
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4176
249. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4177
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4178
250. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4179
251. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4181
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4182
252. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4183
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4184
253. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4185
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4186
254. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4187
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4188
255. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4189
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4190
256. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4191
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4192
257. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4193
258. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4195
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4196
259. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4197
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4198
260. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4199
261. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4201
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4202
262. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4203
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4204
263. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4205
264. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4207
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4208
265. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4209
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4210
266. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4211
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4212
267. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4213
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4214
268. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4215
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4216
269. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4217
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4218
270. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4219
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4220
271. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4221
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4222
272. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4223
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4224
273. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4225
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4226
274. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4227
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4228
275. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4229
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4230
276. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4231
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4232
277. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4233
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4234
278. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4235
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4236
279. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4237
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4238
280. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4239
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4240
281. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4241
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4242
282. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4243
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4244
283. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4245
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4246
284. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4247
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4248
285. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4249
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4250
286. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4251
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4252
287. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4253
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4254
288. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4255
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4256
289. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4257
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4258
290. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4259
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4260
291. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4261
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4262
292. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4263
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4264
293. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4265
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4266
294. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4267
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4268
295. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4269
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4270
296. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4271
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4272
297. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4273
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4274
298. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4275
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4276
299. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4277
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4278
300. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4279
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4280
301. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4281
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4282
302. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4283
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4284
303. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4285
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4286
304. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4287
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4288
305. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4289
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4290
306. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4291
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4292
307. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4293
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4294
308. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4295
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4296
309. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4297
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4298
310. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4299
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4300
311. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4301
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4302
312. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4303
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4304
313. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4305
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4306
314. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4307
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4308
315. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4309
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4310
316. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4311
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4312
317. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4313
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4314
318. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4315
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4316
319. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4317
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4318
320. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4319
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4320
321. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4321
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4322
322. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4323
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4324
323. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4325
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4326
324. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4327
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4328
325. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4329
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4330
326. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4331
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4332
327. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4333
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4334
328. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4335
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4336
329. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4337
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4338
330. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4339
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4340
331. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4341
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4342
332. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4343
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4344
333. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4345
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4346
334. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4347
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4348
335. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4349
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4350
336. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4351
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4352
337. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4353
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4354
338. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4355
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4356
339. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4357
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4358
340. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4359
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4360
View publication stats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity

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 Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity

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 · June 2023

502 PUBLICATIONS 21,450 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs View project

On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Dimension Dominating As 3

Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating). Let a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10

be a Reverse Dimension Dominating 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-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 14

∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E 0 : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 15

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 16

∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E 0 : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 18

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 19

∀Va , ∃Vb ∈ V 0 : ∃Ed ∈ EN SHG , Va , Vc ∈ Ed

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if the following expression is called 20

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating criteria holds 21

∀Va , ∃Vb ∈ V 0 : ∃Ed ∈ EN SHG , Va , Vc ∈ Ed

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

SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 23

Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 24

v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 25

Dominating. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating). Assume a Neutrosophic 26

SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 27

SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 28

SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 29

Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 30

v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 31

maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme 33

cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 34

Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 36

Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 37

re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, 38

and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a 39

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 40

cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 41

of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 42

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 43

SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating; an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating 44

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 45

Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 46

v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 47

Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 49

Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 50

SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 51

consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 52

corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Dimension 54

Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 55

Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 56

v-SuperHyperReverse Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Dimension 57

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as 59

the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 60