Ew Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super Con

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/371853181
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super Con
Preprint · June 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8080100
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
512 PUBLICATIONS 23,180 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 25 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 Strict Connective As Hyper 3
Conceit On Super Con 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 Strict Connective). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10
is a Reverse Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E 0 : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb

And ∀Ea ∈ EN SHG : (T (E), I(E), F (E)) <
maximum number of Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP)
from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi
to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s.;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 16

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

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 21

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 23
Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 24
v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 25
((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective). 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 Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 29
Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 30
v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 31
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 32
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 33
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 34
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 35
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s 36
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 37
re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and 38
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 39
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 40
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 41
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 42
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 43
Connective; an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 44
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict 45
Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic 46
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 47
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 48
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the 49
Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 50
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 51
form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Extreme power is 52
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 53
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 54
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict 55
Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a 56
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 57
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 58
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 59
SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 60
consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 61
that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Neutrosophic 62
power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse 63
Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 64
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 66
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 67
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 68
consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 69
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; a 70
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic 71
e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 72
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse 73
Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is 74
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 75
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 76
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they 77
form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse 78
Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 79
Strict Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 80
v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 81
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 82
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 83
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an 84
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 85
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 86
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 87
coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 88
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 91
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains 92
the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum 93
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 94
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 95
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 96
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Neutrosophic power is 97
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is 98
introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and 99
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. Two different types of 100
SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the research goes further and the 101
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and SuperHyperClass based on that are 102
well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature review is implemented in the whole of 103
this research. For shining the elegancy and the significancy of this research, the 104
comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions and 105
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions are followed by the 106
examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with different tools. The 107
applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical aspect of this ongoing 108
research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to figure out the 109
challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special case is up. 110
The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. Some of 111
them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. These 112
types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 113
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 114
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 115
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 116
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 117
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 118
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 119
δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 120
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 121
(Neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 122
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 123
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 124
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is a 125
maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 126
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 127
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 128
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 129
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 130
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 131
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 132
version of a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective . Since there’s more ways to get type-results 133
to make a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective more understandable. For the sake of having 134
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 135
“SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 136
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 137
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperReverse 138
Strict Connective . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the 139
mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, 140
HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” 141
with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number of Position in 142
Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, 143
“The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 144
HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 145
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 146
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 147
based on a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have 148
the foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need 149
to have all SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective until the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then 150
it’s officially called a “SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” but otherwise, it isn’t a 151
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective . There are some instances about the clarifications for 152
the main definition titled a “SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective ”. These two examples get 153
more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of 154
the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective . For the sake of having 155
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of 156
a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” and a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 157
Strict Connective ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the 158
labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the 159
position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 160
It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a 161
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 162
Connective” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of 163
SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a 164
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective more understandable. Assume a 165
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if 166
the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 167
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 168
SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 169
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic 170
SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic 171
SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a 172
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” where it’s the strongest [the maximum 173
Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective amid the maximum 174
value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective .] 175
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective . A graph is a SuperHyperUniform if it’s a 176
SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 177
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some SuperHyperClasses as 178
follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 179
SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s only 180
one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar 181
it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s 182
SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 183
SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has no 184
SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 185
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi 186
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a SuperHyperWheel if it’s only 187
one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex 188
has one SuperHyperEdge with any common SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel 189
proposes the specific designs and the specific architectures. The SuperHyperModel is 190
officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this 191
SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are 192
SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the common and intended properties 193
between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as 194
“SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some degrees of determinacy, 195
indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise SuperHyperModel which in this case 196
the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In the future research, the foundation 197
will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the results and the definitions will be 198
introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 199
The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and 200
the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the 201
move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, 202
indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that 203
region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Neutrosophic 204
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 205
There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 206
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the cancer 207
on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 208
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, SuperHyperStar, 209
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 210
either the longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective or the strongest SuperHyperReverse Strict 211
Connective in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperReverse 212
Strict Connective, called SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and the strongest SuperHyperReverse 213
Strict Connective, called Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, some general results 214
are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have 215
only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 216
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. There isn’t any 217
formation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 218
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 219
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective theory, 220
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 221
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 222
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 223
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 224
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 225
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 226
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 227
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 228
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 229
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 230
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 231
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 232
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 233
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 234
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 235
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 236
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 237
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 238
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 239
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 240
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 241
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 242
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 243
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 244
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 245
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 246
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 247
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 248
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 249
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 250
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 251
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 252
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 253
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 254
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 255
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 256
formally called “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” in the themes of jargons and 257
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 258
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in 259
the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 260
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 261
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 262
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 263
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 264
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 265
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 266
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 267
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 268
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, SuperHyperStar, 269
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 270
either the optimal SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 271
Strict Connective in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general results are 272
introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 273
s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least 274
three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. There 275
isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective but literarily, it’s the 276
deformation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t 277
form. 278
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 279
find the “ amount of SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” of either individual of cells or the 280
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 281
of SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 282
group of cells? 283
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 284
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 285
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 286
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 287
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” on 288
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 289
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 290
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 291
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 292
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 293
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 294
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 295
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 296
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 297
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 298
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 299
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 300
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 301
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, are figured out in sections “ 302
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective”. In 303
the sense of tackling on getting results and in Reverse Strict Connective to make sense about 304
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 305
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 306
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 307
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. As going 308
back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 309
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 310
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 311
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 312
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 313
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 314
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 315
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective”, 316
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 317
“Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 318
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 319
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 320
presented in section, “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective”. The keyword of this research 321
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 322
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 323
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 324
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 325
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 326
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 327
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 328
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 329
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 330
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 331
Research On the Redeemed Ways 332
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 333
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 334
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.5,p.2), 335
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 336
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 337
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 338
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [1],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 339
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 340
(Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 341
to Ref. [222]. 342
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 343
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 344
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.1,p.1). 345
Let X be a Reverse Strict Connective 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 346
+
]− 0, 1 [. 347
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2). 348
Let X be a Reverse Strict Connective 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 349
2.5,p.2). 350
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 351
pair S = (V, E), where 352
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 353
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 354
1, 2, . . . , n); 355
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 356
V; 357
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 358
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 359
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 360
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 361
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 362
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 363
(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 . 364
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 365
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 366
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 367
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 368
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 369
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 370
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 371
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 372
the ii0 th element of the Reverse Strict Connective of Neutrosophic 373
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 374
and E are crisp sets. 375
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 376
(Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3). 377
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 378
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 379
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 380
characterized as follow-up items. 381
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 382
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 383
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 384
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 385
HyperEdge; 386
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 387
SuperEdge; 388
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 389
SuperHyperEdge. 390
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 391
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 392
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3). 393
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 394
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 395
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 396
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 397
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 398
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 399
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)). 400
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 401
pair S = (V, E), where 402
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 403
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 404
1, 2, . . . , n); 405
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 406
V; 407
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 408
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 409
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 410
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 411
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 412
supp(Ei0 ) = V, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ).
P
(viii) i0 413
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 414
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 415
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 416
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 417
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 418
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 419
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 420
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 421
the ii0 th element of the Reverse Strict Connective of Neutrosophic 422
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 423
and E are crisp sets. 424
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 425
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 427
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 428
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 429
characterized as follow-up items. 430
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 431
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 432
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 433
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 434
HyperEdge; 435
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 436
SuperEdge; 437
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 438
SuperHyperEdge. 439
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 440
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 441
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 442
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 443
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 444
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 445
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 446
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 447
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 448
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 449
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 450
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 451
given SuperHyperEdges; 452
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 453
SuperHyperEdges; 454
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 455
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 456
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 457
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 458
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 459
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 460
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 461
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 462
common SuperVertex. 463
Definition 3.14. Let a pair S = (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)

S. Then a sequence of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs
is called a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 464
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 465
of following conditions hold: 466
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 467
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 468
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 475
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 476
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 477
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). a

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
could be characterized as follow-up items. 478
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 479
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 480
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 481
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 482
SuperHyperPath . 483
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 484
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). A

Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV)
V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs is sequence of Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) and Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)
V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , . . . , Vs−1 , Es−1 , Vs ,
have 486
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 487
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 488
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 489
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 490
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 491
(NSHE)). (Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). 492
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 493
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 494
(ix) Neutrosophic t-connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 495
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 496
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 497
(x) Neutrosophic i-connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 498
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 499
(xi) Neutrosophic f-connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 501
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 502
(xii) Neutrosophic connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 504
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 505
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 506
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 507
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 508
).
Connective 509
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 511
either V 0 or E 0 is called 512
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression is 513
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 514

(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression 515
is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 516

and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 517
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression is 518
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 519

(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression 520
is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 521

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 522
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic 523
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic 525
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 526
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective). 527
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic 530
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 533
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 534
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 535
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 536
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 537
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 538
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic 539
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 542
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 543
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 544
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 545
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 546
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 547
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 548
re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 550
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an 551
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 552
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 554
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 555
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Extreme power is corresponded 557
to its Extreme coefficient; 558
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial 559
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 560
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a 562
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 565
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 569
Neutrosophic coefficient; 570
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic 571
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 574
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 577
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 579
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of 580
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse 581
Strict Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic 582
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 583
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 584
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 585
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial if 589
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 590
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an 592
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 595
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 596
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Extreme power is corresponded 598
to its Extreme coefficient; 599
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial 600
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 601
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a 603
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 607
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 610
Neutrosophic coefficient. 611
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective). 612
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 613
(i) an δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 614
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective such that either of the following expressions hold 615
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 616
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ.
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the 617
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 618
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is a Neutrosophic kind of 619
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective such that either of the following 620
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 621
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 622
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ;

|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ.
The Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. 623
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 624
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 625
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, there’s a need 626
to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 627
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 628
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 629
assign to the values. 630
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 631
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 632
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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, Mentioned in the Definition
(3.22)
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 633
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 634
understandable. 635
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 636
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 637
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 638
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 639
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 640
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 641
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 642
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 643
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 644
. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a Neutrosophic

Strict Connective 645
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective more Neutrosophicly understandable. 646
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, there’s a need 647
to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 648
Connective”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels 649
from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of 650
labels to assign to the values. 651
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. It’s redefined a 652
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the Table (3) holds. 653

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As Reverse Strict Connective 654
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 655
Forms 656
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 657
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is 659
called Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is 660
called Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic 661
probability of A. 662
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 663
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is 665
called Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called 666
Neutrosophic s-independent criteria 667
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 668
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 669
criteria 670
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)

Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 671
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Any k-function Reverse Strict Connective like E 673
is called Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function Reverse Strict Connective 674
like E is called Neutrosophic Variable. 675
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 676
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 677
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 679
number is called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 680
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 681
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 682
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. A Neutrosophic number is called 684
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 685
Crossing criteria 686
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.

Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 687
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let m and n propose 688
special Reverse Strict Connective. Then with m ≥ 4n, 689
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 690
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 691
Neutrosophic independently with probability Reverse Strict Connective p := 4n/m, and set 692
H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 693
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: 694
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
695
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 696
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let P be a 697
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of 698
SuperHyperLines
√ in the plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 699
1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 700
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 701
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points 702
on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 703
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 704
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 705
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 706
again l < 32n2 /k 3 . 707
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let P be a 709
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P 710
at unit SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 711
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 712
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 713
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 714
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 715
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
716
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 717
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on 718
the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 719
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 720
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 721
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 722
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 723
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 724
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 725
4/3 4/3
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n + n < 5n . 726
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 727
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let X be a 728
nonnegative Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 729
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. 730
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 731
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let Xn be a 732
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Reverse Strict Connective (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 733
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 734
Proof. 735
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. A special 737
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 738
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. A special SuperHyperGraph in 740
Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 741
SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 742
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 743
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 744
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 745
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 746
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 747
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 748
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 749
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: 750
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 751
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 752
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 753
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 754
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 755
stability number at most k. 756
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 757
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 759
number is called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called 760
Neutrosophic Variance criteria 761
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let X be a 763
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 764
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let X be a Neutrosophic 766
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 767
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
768
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let Xn be a 770
Neutrosophic Variable in a probability Reverse Strict Connective (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 771
and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 772
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Set X := Xn and 774
t := |Ex(Xn )| in Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that 775
E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| 776
when Xn = 0. 777
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 779
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 780
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 781
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 782
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. As in the proof of related 784
Theorem, the result is straightforward. 785
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let 787
f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 788
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 789
or 790
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 791
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. The latter is 793
straightforward. 794
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 795
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let P be a monotone property of 797
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 798
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 799
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 800
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 801
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 802
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 804
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 805
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 806
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. Let F be a nonempty 808
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 809
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 810
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 811
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Connective. The latter is 813
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 815
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 816
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 817
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is 818
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 819
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 820
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 821
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 822
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 823
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 824
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 825
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 826
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective =

{}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Reverse Strict Connective =
{}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Reverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
827
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 830
SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms 831
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic 832
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is 833
Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it 834
as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is 835
excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 836

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

837
Neutrosophicly straightforward. 840

{}.
= 0z 0 .
{}.
= 0z 0 .
841

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


845

{E2 }.
= z 6−c .
{V5 }.
= z 7−c .

849

{Ei }22
i=12 .
= z 3−a .
{Vi , V21 }10
i=1 .
= z 3−a .
853

{E15 , E16 , E17 }.
= z 3−a .
{V12 , V13 , V14 }.
= z 3−a .

857

{E1 , E2 , E3 }.
= z 3−a .
{V12 , V13 , V14 }.
= z 3−a .
861

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



865

{E1 , E2 , E3 }.
= z 3−a .
{V12 , V13 , V14 }.
= z 3−a .
869

{E1 , E3 }.
= z 3−a .
{V1 , V6 }.
= z 5−a .
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.3)
873

{E1 }.
= z 5−a .
{V1 , V2 , V3 , V7 , V8 }.
= z 5−a .
877

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E9 , E3 }.
= z 3−a .
{V1 , V6 }.
= z 5−a .
881

{E2 }.
= z 3−a .
{V1 }.
= z 5−a .
885

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 3−a .
{V3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 3−a .
889

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 }.
= z 2−a .
893

(16.3)

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 , V27 }.
= z 2−a .
897

{E3i+2 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 , V27 }.
= z 2−a .
901

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E3i+1 }3i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2i+1 }5i=0 .
= z 2−a .
905

{E6 }.
= z 4−a .
{V1 }.
= z 6−a .

(16.3)
909

{E2 }.
= z |1−a| .
{V1 }.
= z |5−a| .
913

(16.3)

(16.3)

{E2i+3 }1i=0 .
= z 1−a .
{V1 , V10 , V6 }.
= z 4−a .
917
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 918
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 919
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 920
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 921
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 922
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 923
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 924
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 925
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 926
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective minus all Neutrosophic 927
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 928
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 929
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective, minus all 930
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 931
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 Strict Connective is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict 932
is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic

Connective 933
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of 934
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 935
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 936
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective in some 937
cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum 938
Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic 939
SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective. 940
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Reverse Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective with the least Neutrosophic 941
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 942
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 943
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 944
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictConnective

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictConnectiveSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictConnective = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseStrictConnectiveSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Reverse Strict Connective. In other words, the least cardinality, the 945
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Reverse Strict Connective is 946
the cardinality of 947

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictConnectiveSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictConnective = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseStrictConnectiveSuperHyperP 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 Strict
Connective 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 Strict Connective. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective 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 Strict
Connective. 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 948
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 949
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 950
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 951
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 952
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 953
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 954
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 955
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective 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
Strict Connective. 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 Strict Connective has the Neutrosophic
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict
Connective 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 Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective” 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 Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 956
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 957
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 958
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 959
free-quasi-triangle. 960
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 Strict Connective. Those Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Reverse Strict
Connective. 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 Strict Connective is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective
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 Strict Connective.

E
Let Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong
to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 961
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective =

E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
962
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective =

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

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic
intended SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective,
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 Strict Connective is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict 963
Connective is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 964
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 965
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 966
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 967
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective in 968
some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 969
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 970
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective. 971
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 972
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 973
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 974
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 975
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 976
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 977
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 978
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 979
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 980
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 981
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 982
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective where the 983
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, 984
a Neutrosophic embedded R-Reverse Strict Connective. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 985
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 986
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 987
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 988
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 989
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 990
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective. The 991
interior types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the 992
Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior 993
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 994
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any 995
distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict 996
Connective. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one 997
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the 998
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In 999
the embedded Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective, there’s the usage of exterior 1000
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than 1001
outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One 1002
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic 1003
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement 1004
has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic 1005
R-Reverse Strict Connective. The Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective with the exclusion of the 1006
exclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1007
and with other terms, the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective with the inclusion of all 1008
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a 1009
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 1010
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic 1011
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct 1012
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Neutrosophic 1013
quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them 1014
but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Neutrosophic 1015
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 1016
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective, minus all 1017
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1018
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective has two titles. a 1019
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective and its corresponded quasi-maximum 1020
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 1021
any Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective with that 1022
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 1023
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1024
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1025
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connectives for all Neutrosophic 1026
numbers less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 1027
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the 1028
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective, again and more in the operations of collecting 1029
all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connectives acted on the all possible used 1030
formations of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. 1031
This Neutrosophic number is 1032
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connectives. 1033
Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective 1034
be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Reverse 1035
Strict Connective. Then 1036
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective is 1037
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1038
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1039
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective. 1040
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective =

{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 1041
Reverse Strict Connective poses the upcoming expressions. 1042

{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1043

= max zNeutrosophic Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1044


To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1045
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1046

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

1047


1048


Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1049
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1050
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1051
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1052
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Connective” but, precisely, it’s the 1053
generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Connective” since “Neutrosophic 1054
Quasi-Reverse Strict Connective” happens “Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective” in a Neutrosophic 1055
SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but “Neutrosophic 1056
SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective” in a 1057
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background 1058
since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise 1059
from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 1060
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Connective”, and “Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective” are up. 1061
Thus, let 1062
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1063
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1064
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective and the new terms are 1065
up. 1066
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1067

{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1068

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1069

And with go back to initial structure, 1070
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1071

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1072


1073


Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1074
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict 1075
Connective if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1076
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1077
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1078
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1079
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1080
are coming up. 1081
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict

Connective. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1082
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1083
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1084
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1085
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1086
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective is
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic
Reverse Strict Connective 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 Strict
Connective 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 Strict Connective. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1087
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1088
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1089
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1090
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective and it’s an 1091
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective. Since it’s 1092
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 Strict Connective.
There isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Reverse Strict Connective, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1093
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1094
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1095
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1096
“Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective” 1097
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1098
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective, 1099
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 Strict Connective amid those
obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict
Connective, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1100
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective is the
cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1101
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1102
quasi-R-Reverse Strict Connective if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 1103
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 1104
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 1105
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1106
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1107
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1108
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1109
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1110
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1111
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1112
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 1113
Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1114
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1115
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1116
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1117
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1118
R-Reverse Strict Connective. Since it doesn’t have 1119
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1121
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1122
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1123
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1124
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic 1125
procedure such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some 1126
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic 1127
SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic 1128
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its 1129
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the 1130
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. 1131
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic 1132
SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. 1133
Thus the obvious Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective, VESHE is up. The obvious simple 1134
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective, VESHE , is 1135
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic 1136
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled 1137
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1138
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1139
SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1140
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1141
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1142
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1143
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1144
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Connective only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1145
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1146
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1147
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1148
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1149
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1150
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1151
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Reverse Strict Connective, is up. There’s neither empty 1152
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1153
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1154
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective. The 1155
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1156

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

Reverse Strict Connective 1157
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1158
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1159

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1160
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1161
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1163
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1164
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1165
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1166
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective is 1167
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic 1168
Reverse Strict Connective is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic 1169
SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1170

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 1172
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1173
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic 1174
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1175

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 1176
. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic


b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1179
ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic 1180
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for some 1181
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet 1182
called the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective and it’s an Neutrosophic 1183
Reverse Strict Connective. Since it’s 1184
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1186
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1187
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1188
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1189
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1190

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective , 1191

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 1192
Strict Connective , not: 1193

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1194

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 1195
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1196
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1197
“Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective ” 1198
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1199
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Connective , 1200
is only and only 1201

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1202
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1203
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1204
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1205
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1206
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1207
Then 1208

|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 1209
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1210
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1211
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1212
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 1213
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. The 1214
latter is straightforward. 1215
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1216
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1217
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1218
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1219
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Example (16.5)
Then 1220

|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 |
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1221
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1222
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1223
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1224

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1228
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1229
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1230
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1232
Then 1233

{Ei }.
= z |Ei | .
{CEN T ER}.
= z |CEN T ER| .
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1234
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1235
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1236
There’s a new way to redefine as 1237

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1241
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1242
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1243
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1244
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 1245
Connective. 1246
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1247
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1248

|P min |
{E3i+2 }i=0
ESHP
.
| min |E | |Ei |
{P min } ESHP
=z 3i+2 i=0 .
EXT ERN AL |P min |
{V2i+2 }i=0
ESHP
.
| min |P min |
|Vi |
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1249
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
1250
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 1251
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1252

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1255
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1256
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1257
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1258
the 1259
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1260
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1261
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1262
solution 1263
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1264
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1265
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1266
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1267
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1268
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1269
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1270
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1271
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1272

|P min |
{E3i+2 }i=0
ESHP
.
| min |E | |Ei |
{P min } ESHP
=z 3i+2 i=0 .
EXT ERN AL |P min |
{V2i+2 }i=0
ESHP
.
| min |P min |
|Vi |
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1273
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
1274
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 1276

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1279
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1280
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1281
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1282
the 1283
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1284
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1285
solution 1287
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1289
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1290
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1291
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1292
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1293
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1294
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1295
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1296
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1297

{Ei }.
= z |Ei | .
{CEN T ER}.
= z |CEN T ER| .
Proof. Let 1298
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1299
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1301

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

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective in the Neutrosophic
Example (16.15)
latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. Thus 1304
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperReverse Strict 1305
Connective could be applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 1306
proposes some longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective excerpt from some representatives. 1307
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1310
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1311
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1312
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1313
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1315
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1316
For the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and 1317
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, some general results are introduced. 1318
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is 1319
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1320
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. Then 1321
N eutrosophic SuperHyperReverseStrictConnective =
{theSuperHyperReverseStrictConnectiveof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperReverseStrictConnective
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperReverseStrictConnective. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1322
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1323
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1324
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1325
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and 1326
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective coincide. 1327
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1329
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if and only if it’s a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1330
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1332
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1333
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1334
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 1335
is its SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and reversely. 1336
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 1337
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1338
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 1339
Connective is its SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and reversely. 1340
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1341
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict 1342
Connective isn’t well-defined. 1343
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1344
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1345
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective isn’t well-defined. 1346
Corollary 6.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict 1347
, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite,

Connective 1348
SuperHyperWheel). Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective isn’t well-defined 1349
if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective isn’t well-defined. 1350
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1351
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 1352
is well-defined. 1353
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1354
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is well-defined if and only if its 1355
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is well-defined. 1356
Corollary 6.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict 1357
, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite,

Connective 1358
SuperHyperWheel). Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is well-defined if 1359
and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective is well-defined. 1360
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1361
is 1362
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1363
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1364
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1365
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1366
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1367
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1368
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1369
∅ is 1370
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1371
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1372
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1373
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1374
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1375
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1376
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1377
independent SuperHyperSet is 1378
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1379
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1380
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1381
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1382
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1383
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1384
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1385
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1386
maximal 1387
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1388
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1389
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1390
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1391
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1392
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1393
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1394
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1395
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1396
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1397
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1398
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1399
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1400
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1401
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1402
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1403
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1405
number of 1406
(i) : the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1407
(ii) : the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1408
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1409
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1410
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1411
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1412
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1413
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1414
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1416
(i) : the dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1417
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1418
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1419
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1420
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1421
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1422
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1423
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1426
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1427
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1428
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1429
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1433
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1434
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1435
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1438
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1439
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1440
is a 1441
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1445
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1446
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1447
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1450
number of 1451
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1455
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1456
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1457
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1458
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1459
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1460
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1462
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1463
(iv) : SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1467
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1468
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1469
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1470
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1471
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1472
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1473
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1474
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1478
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1480
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1482
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1483
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1487
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1488
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1489
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1491
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1493
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1494
of a dual 1495
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1499
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1500
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1501
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1503
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1504
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1505
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1511
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1512
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1513
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1514
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1515
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1516
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1517
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S 1518
such that 1519
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1520
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1521
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1522
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then 1523
(i) S is SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective set; 1524
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1525
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1526
Then 1527
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1528
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1529
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1530
which is connected. Then 1531
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1532
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1533
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1534
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1535
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1537
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1538
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1539
a dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1540
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1541
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict 1542
Connective; 1543
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1544
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1545
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1546
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1547
dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1548
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. Then 1549
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1550
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1552
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1553
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1554
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1555
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. Then 1557
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1558
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1560
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1561
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1562
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1564
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1565
(ii) Γ = 1; 1566
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1567
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1568
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1569
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1570
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1571
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1572
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1573
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1574
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1575
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1576
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1577
Strict Connective; 1578
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1579
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1580
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1581
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1583
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1584
Strict Connective; 1585
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1586
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

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

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1604
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=12
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Strict 1605
Connective for N SHF : (V, E). 1606
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1607
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1608
SuperHyperSet. Then 1609
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1610
Strict Connective for N SHF : (V, E); 1611
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1612

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1613
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=12
are only dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Strict 1614
Connective for N SHF : (V, E). 1615
Then following statements hold; 1617
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1618
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then S is an 1619
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1620
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1621
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then S is a dual 1622
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1623
Then following statements hold; 1625
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1626
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then S is an 1627
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1628
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1629
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, then S is a dual 1630
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1631
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1632
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1633
statements hold; 1634
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1635
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; 1636
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1637
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1639
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1641
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1642
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1643
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1644
statements hold; 1645
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c

+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1646
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1648
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1650
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1652
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 1653
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1655
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1656
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

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

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

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

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

sophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective
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 Strict Connective
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1738
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1739
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1740
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1741
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1742
Neutrosophic featured. 1743
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1744
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1745
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1746
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1747
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1748
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1750
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1751
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1752
The SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 1753
Connective are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1754
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1755
recognitions? 1756
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperReverse Strict 1757
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective?

Connective 1758
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1759
compute them? 1760
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1761
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective? 1762
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 1763
do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and they’re based on

SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, are there else? 1765
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1766
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1767
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1768
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1769
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1770
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1771
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1772
highlighted. 1773
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1774
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1775
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. For that sake in the second definition, the main 1776
definition of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the 1777
alphabets. Based on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the 1778
new SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, finds the 1779
convenient background to implement some results based on that. Some 1780
SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this 1781
research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to 1782
recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To 1783
formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, the 1784
new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results 1785
are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and the Neutrosophic 1786
SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have 1787
taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the 1788
lines containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1789
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both 1790
bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on 1791
the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the 1792
SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the 1793
moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 1794
and the architecture are formally called “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective” in the themes 1795
of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the 1796
embedded styles to figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table 1797
(6), benefits and avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1798
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1799
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1800
Forms 1801
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1802
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1806
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1807
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1808
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1809
|Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1810
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1811
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1812
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1813
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1814
|Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1815
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1816
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1817
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1818
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1819
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1822
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1824
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1825
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1826
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1829
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1830
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1833
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1834
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1837
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1838
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1839
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1840
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1841
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1846
Extreme coefficient; 1847
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1848
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1849
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1851
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1852
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1853
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1857
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1859
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1864
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1866
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1867
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1871
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1874
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1875
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1883
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1885
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1894
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1899
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1900
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1901
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1902
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1903
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1904
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1905
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1906
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 1909
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1910
SuperHyperDuality. 1915


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 1978
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1979
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 1980
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 1984
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1988
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1989
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1990
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 1991
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2002
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 2003
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2013
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 2016
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 2021
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2022
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2023
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2024
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2025
solution 2028
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2035

= {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 2038
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2039

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2045
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2050
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2058
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 2060
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 2061
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 2062
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2063

∃!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 2068
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2069
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2076
Forms 2078
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2079
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2083
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2084
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2085
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2086
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2088
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2089
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2090
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2091
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2093
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2094
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2095
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2096
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2099
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2100
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2101
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2106
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2107
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2109
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2110
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2114
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2115
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2116
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2117
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2123
coefficient; 2124
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2125
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2134
coefficient; 2135
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2136
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2139
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2140
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2143
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2151
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2152
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2160
coefficient; 2161
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2162
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2171
coefficient. 2172
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2176
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2177
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2178
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2179
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2180
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2181
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 2182
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 2183
SuperHyperJoin. 2184
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 2258
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2262
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2266

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

.
Proof. Let 2269
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2280
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 2281

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2291
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 2294
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 2299
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2300
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2301
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2303
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2304
solution 2306
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2313

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 2316
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2317

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2321
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2322
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2323
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2328
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2336

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

.
Proof. Let 2339
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2340

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2344
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2345
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2346
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2347
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2354
Forms 2356
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2357
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2361
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2362
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2363
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2364
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2366
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2367
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2368
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2369
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2371
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2372
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2373
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2374
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2377
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2379
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2384
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2385
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2392
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2393
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2394
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2395
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2401
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2403
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2404
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2412
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2414
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2419
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2421
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2422
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2429
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2430
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2438
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2440
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2449
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2454
SuperHyperPerfect. 2462
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 2536
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2540
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2544
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 2547
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2558
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2559

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2569
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 2572
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 2577
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2578
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2579
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2580
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2581
solution 2584
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2591

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 2594
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2595

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2599
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2600
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2601
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2606
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2614
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2617

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2618

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2622
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2623
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2624
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2625
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2632
Forms 2634
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2635
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2639
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2640
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2641
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2642
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2644
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2645
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2646
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2647
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2649
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2650
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2651
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2652
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2655
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2657
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2662
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2663
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2665
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2670
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2671
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2672
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2679
coefficient; 2680
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2681
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2690
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2692
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2699
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2700
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2707
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2708
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2716
coefficient; 2717
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2718
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2727
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2732
SuperHyperTotal. 2740
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 2814
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2818
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2822
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 2825
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 2836
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 2837
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2847
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 2850
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2855
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2856
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2859
solution 2862
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2869

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 2872
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2873

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2877
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2878
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2884
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2892
∗
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 2895
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2896

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2900
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2901
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2902
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2903
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2910
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2911
Forms 2912
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2913
SuperHyperConnected). 2914
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2918
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2919
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2920
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2921
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2922
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2923
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2925
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2926
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2927
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2928
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2929
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2930
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2932
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2933
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2934
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2935
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2938
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2940
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2941
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2942
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2943
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2945
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2946
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2949
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2950
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2953
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2954
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2955
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2956
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2957
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2958
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2959
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2960
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2961
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2962
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2963
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2964
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2965
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2966
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2967
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2968
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2969
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2970
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2972
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2973
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2974
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2975
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2978
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2979
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 2980
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 2981
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2982
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2983
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2986
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2987
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2990
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2991
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2994
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 2995
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 2996
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2997
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 2998
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 3000
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3002
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3005
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 3006
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 3007
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3008
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3011
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3012
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3016
SuperHyperConnected. 3024
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 3098
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 3102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3106
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 3109
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 3120
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 3121
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3131
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 3134
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3139
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3140
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3143
solution 3146
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3153
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 3156
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3161
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3162
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3168
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3176
∗
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 3179
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3181

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3184
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3185
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3186
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3187
17 Background 3195
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3196
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3197
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “New Ideas In Recognition of 3198
Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot” in Ref. [1] 3199
by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3200
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms with 3201
introducing used neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published 3202
in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Current Trends in Mass Communication 3203
(CTMC)” with ISO abbreviation “Curr Trends Mass Comm” in volume 2 and issue 1 3204
with pages 32-55. 3205
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3206
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3207
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3208
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3209
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3210
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3211
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3212
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3213
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3214
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3215
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3216
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3217
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3218
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3219
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3220
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3221
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3222
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3223
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3224
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3225
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3226
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3227
SuperHyperNumbers. 3228
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Super Hyper Dominating 3229
and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions 3230
in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett 3231
(2022). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3232
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and 3233
using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s 3234
published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical 3235
Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math 3236
Techniques Comput Math” in volume 1 and issue 3 with pages 242-263. The research 3237
article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and 3238
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3239
background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and 3240
groundbreaking article is titled “neutrosophic co-degree and neutrosophic degree 3241
alongside chromatic numbers in the setting of some classes related to neutrosophic 3242
hypergraphs” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel 3243
approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 3244
based on general forms without using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic 3245
SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal 3246
of Current Trends in Computer Science Research (JCTCSR)” with ISO abbreviation “J 3247
Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in volume 2 and issue 1 with pages 16-24. The research 3248
article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic 3249
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3250
background. The research article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic 3251
hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward 3252
independent results based on initial background. In some articles are titled “0039 — 3253
Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring 3254
alongside (Dual)Dominating in (Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [6] by 3255
Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” 3256
in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme 3257
of Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3258
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty 3259
On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward 3260
Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled 3261
Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of 3262
Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” 3263
in Ref. [10] by Henry Garrett (2022), “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The 3264
Cells and Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3265
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) 3266
SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3267
SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and 3268
Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed 3269
SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3270
in Ref. [12] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the 3271
Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes 3272
in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism 3273
of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition 3274
Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3275
“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3276
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 3277
Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on 3278
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [16] by Henry 3279
Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction 3280
To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And 3281
Beyond ” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on 3282
Cancer’s Recognition by Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” 3283
in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3284
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3285
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3286
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3287
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett 3288
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3289
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3290
in Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3291
Recognitions Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in 3292
Ref. [21] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With 3293
SuperHyperDefensive and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3294
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3295
And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [22] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3296
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3297
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3298
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3299
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3300
Treatments” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3301
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3302
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [25] by Henry Garrett 3303
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3304
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [192] by Henry 3305
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3306
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3307
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [193] by Henry Garrett 3308
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3309
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3310
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [194] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3311
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3312
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3313
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [195] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3314
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3315
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [198] by 3316
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3317
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3318
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [199] by Henry 3319
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3320
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3321
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [202] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3322
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3323
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [205] by Henry 3324
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3325
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3326
in Ref. [206] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3327
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3328
Ref. [207] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3329
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3330
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [208] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3331
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3332
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [209] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3333
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3334
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [210] by Henry Garrett 3335
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3336
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [221] by Henry 3337
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3338
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3339
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [222] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–222], there 3340
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3341
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3342
at [223–347]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3343
readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [348, 349]. 3344
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3345
proposed as book in Ref. [348] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3346
Scholar and has more than 4728 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3347
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3348
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3349
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3350
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3351
proposed as book in Ref. [349] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3352
Scholar and has more than 5721 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3353
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3354
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3355
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3356
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3357
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3358
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3359
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3360
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3361
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–222] 3362
alongside scientific research books at [223–347]. Two popular scientific research books 3363
in Scribd in the terms of high readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic 3364
science is on [348, 349]. 3365
References 3366
1. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3367
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Curr Trends Mass Comm 3368
2(1) (2023) 32-55. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/new- 3369
ideas-in-recognition-of-cancer-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-as-hyper- 3370
tool-on-super-toot.pdf) 3371
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3372
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3373
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3374
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3375
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3376
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3377
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3378
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3379
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3380
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3381
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3382
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3383
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3384
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3385
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. (doi: 3386
10.33140/JCTCSR.02.01.04) 3387
5. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3388
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3389
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3390
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3391
6. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3392
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3393
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3394
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3395
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3396
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3397
7. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3398
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3399
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3400
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3401
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3402
8. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3403
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3404
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3405
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3406
9. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3407
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3408
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3409
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3410
10. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3411
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3412
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3413
11. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3414
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3415
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3416
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3417
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3418
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3419
12. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3420
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3421
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3422
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3423
13. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3424
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3425
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3426
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3427
14. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3428
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3429
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3430
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3431
15. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3432
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3433
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3434
16. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3435
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3436
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3437
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3438
17. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3439
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3440
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3441
18. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3442
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3443
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3444
19. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3445
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3446
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3448
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3452
21. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3453
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3454
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3455
22. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3456
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3457
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3458
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3459
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3460
23. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3461
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3462
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3463
24. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3464
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3465
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3466
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3467
25. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3468
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3469
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3470
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3471
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3473
Super Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8078445). 3474
27. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Unequal 3475
Connective Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3476
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8078543). 3477
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3479
29. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Strict 3481
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3485
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8072171). 3486
31. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Reverse 3487
Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3488
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3491
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8067384). 3492
33. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Equal 3493
Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3494
SuperHyperGraph By Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3497
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8061927). 3498
35. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Dimension 3499
Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3500
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8062016). 3501
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3503
37. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse 3505
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3509
39. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Equal 3511
SuperHyperGraph By Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On Super 3515
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8051346). 3516
41. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Connective 3517
SuperHyperGraph By United Dominating As Hyper Ultra On Super Units”, 3521
43. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Units By Hyper Ultra Of United 3523
SuperHyperGraph By Zero Forcing As Hyper ford On Super forceps”, Zenodo 3527
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8017246). 3528
45. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super forceps By Hyper ford Of Zero Forcing In 3529
Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3530
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020128). 3531
SuperHyperGraph By Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super matte”, Zenodo 3533
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978571). 3534
47. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super mat By Hyper matte Of Matrix-Based In 3535
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3536
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978857). 3537
SuperHyperGraph By Dominating-Edges As Hyper Dome On Super Eddy”, 3539
49. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Dome Of 3541
Dominating-Edges In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3542
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab”, Zenodo 2023, 3545
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595). 3546
51. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gab By Hyper Gape Of Edge-Gap In 3547
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923632). 3549
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3551
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3552
53. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3553
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3554
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3557
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3558
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3559
55. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3560
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3561
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3562
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3563
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3565
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3566
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3568
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3571
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3574
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3577
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3578
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3580
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3583
63. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3585
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3586
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3589
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3592
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3595
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3596
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3598
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3601
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3602
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3604
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3607
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3610
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3613
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3616
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3619
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3620
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3622
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3623
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3625
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3626
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3628
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3631
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3634
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3635
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3637
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3640
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3641
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3642
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3644
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3645
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3647
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3648
84. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3649
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3650
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3653
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3656
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3657
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3659
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3660
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3662
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3665
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3668
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3671
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3674
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3677
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3680
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3683
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3686
97. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3688
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3689
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3690
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3692
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3695
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3696
100. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3697
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3699
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3701
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3704
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3707
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3708
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3710
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3711
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3713
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3714
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3715
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3716
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3717
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3719
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3722
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3725
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3726
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3728
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3731
112. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3733
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3735
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3737
114. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3739
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3740
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3743
116. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3745
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3746
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3749
118. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3751
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3753
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3755
120. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3757
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3758
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3761
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3762
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3764
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3767
124. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3769
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3771
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3773
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3774
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3776
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3778
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3780
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3782
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3783
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3784
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3785
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3786
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3788
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3789
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3790
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3791
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3794
133. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3796
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3797
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3800
135. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3802
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3803
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3806
137. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3808
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3810
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3812
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3813
139. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3814
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3815
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3818
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3819
141. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3820
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3821
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3824
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3825
143. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3826
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3827
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3830
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3831
145. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3832
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3833
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3836
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3837
147. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3838
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3839
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3842
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3843
149. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3844
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3845
150. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3847
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3848
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3851
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3852
152. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3853
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3854
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3857
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3858
154. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3859
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3860
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3863
156. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3865
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3866
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3869
158. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3871
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3872
159. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3874
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3875
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3878
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3881
162. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3883
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3884
163. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3886
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3887
164. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3889
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3890
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3891
165. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3892
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3893
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3894
166. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3895
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3896
167. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3898
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3899
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3900
168. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3901
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3902
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3903
169. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3904
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3905
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3906
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3907
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3910
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3911
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3914
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3915
172. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3916
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3918
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3919
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3922
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3923
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3926
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3927
175. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3928
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3929
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3930
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3931
176. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3932
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3933
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3934
177. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3935
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3936
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3937
178. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3938
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3939
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3940
179. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3941
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3942
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3943
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3944
180. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3945
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3946
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3947
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3948
181. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3949
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3950
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3951
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3952
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3953
182. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3954
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3955
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3956
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3957
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3958
183. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3959
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3960
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3961
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3962
184. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3963
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3964
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3965
185. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3966
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3967
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3969
186. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3970
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3971
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3972
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3973
187. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3974
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3975
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3976
188. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3977
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3978
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3979
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3980
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3981
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3982
189. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3983
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3984
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3985
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3986
190. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3987
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3988
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3989
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3990
191. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3991
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3992
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3993
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3994
192. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3995
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3996
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3997
193. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3998
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3999
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 4000
194. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4002
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4003
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4004
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4005
195. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 4006
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 4007
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 4008
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 4009
196. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4010
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4011
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4012
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4013
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4015
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4016
198. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 4017
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 4018
199. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 4020
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 4021
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 4022
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4027
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 4031
202. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 4032
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 4033
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 4034
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 4035
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 4038
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4040
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 4041
205. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 4042
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 4043
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 4046
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 4047
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4049
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 4050
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4053
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 4054
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4056
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 4057
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4060
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 4061
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 4063
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 4064
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 4066
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 4071
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 4072
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 4076
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 4077
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 4080
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 4083
217. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4084
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4085
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 4086
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 4087
218. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4088
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4089
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4090
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 4091
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 4094
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 4095
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4098
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 4099
221. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 4100
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 4101
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 4102
222. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 4103
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 4104
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4105
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 4106
223. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4107
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8078574). 4108
224. Henry Garrett, “Strict Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4109
225. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4111
226. Henry Garrett, “Equal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4113
227. Henry Garrett, “Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4115
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8062076). 4116
228. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4117
229. Henry Garrett, “Equal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4119
230. Henry Garrett, “Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4121
231. Henry Garrett, “United Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4123
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8027488). 4124
232. Henry Garrett, “Zero Forcing In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4125
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020181). 4126
233. Henry Garrett, “Matrix-Based In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4127
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978921). 4128
234. Henry Garrett, “Collections of Math II”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4129
10.5281/zenodo.7943878). 4130
235. Henry Garrett, “Dominating-Edges In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4131
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943871). 4132
236. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Gap In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4133
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923786). 4134
237. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4135
238. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4137
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904586). 4138
239. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4139
240. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4141
241. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4143
242. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4145
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 4146
243. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4147
244. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4149
245. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4151
246. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4153
247. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4155
248. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4157
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4158
249. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4159
250. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4161
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 4162
251. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4163
252. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4165
253. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4167
254. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4169
255. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4171
256. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4173
257. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4175
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4176
258. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4177
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4178
259. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4179
260. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4181
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4182
261. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4183
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4184
262. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4185
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4186
263. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4187
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4188
264. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4189
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4190
265. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4191
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4192
266. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4193
267. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4195
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4196
268. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4197
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4198
269. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4199
270. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4201
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4202
271. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4203
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4204
272. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4205
273. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4207
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4208
274. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4209
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4210
275. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4211
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4212
276. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4213
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4214
277. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4215
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4216
278. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4217
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4218
279. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4219
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4220
280. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4221
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4222
281. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4223
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4224
282. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4225
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4226
283. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4227
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4228
284. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4229
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4230
285. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4231
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4232
286. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4233
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4234
287. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4235
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4236
288. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4237
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4238
289. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4239
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4240
290. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4241
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4242
291. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4243
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4244
292. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4245
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4246
293. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4247
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4248
294. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4249
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4250
295. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4251
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4252
296. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4253
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4254
297. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4255
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4256
298. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4257
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4258
299. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4259
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4260
300. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4261
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4262
301. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4263
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4264
302. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4265
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4266
303. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4267
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4268
304. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4269
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4270
305. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4271
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4272
306. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4273
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4274
307. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4275
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4276
308. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4277
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4278
309. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4279
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4280
310. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4281
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4282
311. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4283
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4284
312. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4285
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4286
313. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4287
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4288
314. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4289
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4290
315. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4291
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4292
316. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4293
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4294
317. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4295
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4296
318. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4297
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4298
319. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4299
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4300
320. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4301
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4302
321. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4303
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4304
322. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4305
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4306
323. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4307
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4308
324. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4309
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4310
325. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4311
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4312
326. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4313
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4314
327. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4315
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4316
328. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4317
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4318
329. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4319
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4320
330. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4321
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4322
331. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4323
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4324
332. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4325
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4326
333. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4327
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4328
334. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4329
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4330
335. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4331
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4332
336. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4333
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4334
337. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4335
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4336
338. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4337
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4338
339. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4339
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4340
340. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4341
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4342
341. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4343
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4344
342. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4345
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4346
343. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4347
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4348
344. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4349
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4350
345. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4351
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4352
346. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4353
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4354
347. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4355
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4356
348. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4357
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4358
349. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4359
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4360
View publication stats

Ew Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super Con

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

Ew Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super Con

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

512 PUBLICATIONS 23,180 CITATIONS

On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper 3

Conceit On Super Con 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 Strict Connective). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10

is a Reverse Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 14

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

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression is called 15

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 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 Strict Connective if the following expression is called 18

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 19

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

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if the following expression is called 20

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective criteria holds 21

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

SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 23

Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 24

v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective. 25

((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective). 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 Strict Connective if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 29

Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 30

v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 31

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

Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 34

SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective if it’s 36

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic 37

re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and 38

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 39

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 41

Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 42

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 43

Connective; an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 44

of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict 45

Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, and Neutrosophic 46

rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 47

N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 48

Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 50

consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 51

corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective 53

SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, 54

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Connective, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict 55

Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 57

SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 58

Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 59

SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality 60

consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such 61