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

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/371939401
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

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

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8092796
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
522 PUBLICATIONS 24,806 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Neutrosophic Graphs View project
On Fuzzy Logic View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 29 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 Dimension Dominating 3
As Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity 4
Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6
DrHenryGarrett@gmail.com · Manhattan, NY, USA 7
1 ABSTRACT 8
In this scientific research, (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 9
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 10
(NSHG) S is a Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 11
SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 12
is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the following 13
expression is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating criteria holds 14
∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E 0 : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb

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

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

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

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse 23
Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 24
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic 25
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Strict 26
Dimension Dominating). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 27
S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. 28
Then E is called an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 29
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 30
re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 31
Dominating , and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for 32
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of 33
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 34
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 35
and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse 36
Strict Dimension Dominating; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either 37
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 38
Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for 40
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 41
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 42
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 43
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 44
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 45
Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 46
Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 47
v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict 48
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is 49
the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 50
Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 51
SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 52
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 53
form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 54
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 55
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 59
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 60
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 61
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 62
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 63
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 64
Dominating; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; an 65
Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of Neutrosophic 66
e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 67
Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic 68
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 69
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 70
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 71
consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 72
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 73
Dominating; a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 74
Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for 77
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 79
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 80
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 82
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is 86
the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 87
Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 88
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 89
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 90
form the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 91
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 92
Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) 96
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 97
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 98
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 99
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 100
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 101
Dominating; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. In 102
this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new SuperHyperNotions, namely, a 103
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 104
Dominating. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut for them but the 105
research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, and 106
SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature 107
review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the 108
significancy of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 109
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions 110
are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with 111
different tools. The applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical 112
aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to 113
figure out the challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special 114
case is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. 115
Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. 116
These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 117
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 118
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 119
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 120
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 121
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 122
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 123
δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 124
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 125
(Neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 126
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 127
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 128
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 129
Dominating is a maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum 130
Neutrosophic cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 131
Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 132
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 133
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 134
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 135
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 136
version of a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating . Since there’s more ways to get 137
type-results to make a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating more understandable. 138
For the sake of having Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, there’s a 139
need to “redefine” the notion of a “SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating ”. The 140
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 141
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 142
assign to the values. Assume a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating . It’s redefined a 143
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the mentioned Table holds, 144
concerning, “The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and 145
SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, 146
“The Values of The Vertices & The Number of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of 147
The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 148
Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The HyperEdges&The 149
maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The SuperHyperEdges&The maximum 150
Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples and instances, I’m going to 151
introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph based on a SuperHyperReverse 152
Strict Dimension Dominating . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have the foundation of 153
previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need to have all 154
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating until the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 155
then it’s officially called a “SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” but otherwise, it 156
isn’t a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating . There are some instances about the 157
clarifications for the main definition titled a “SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating ”. 158
These two examples get more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in 159
the disciplinary ways of the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 160
Dominating . For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 161
there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 162
Dominating” and a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating ”. The 163
assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined 166
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended Table holds. And a SuperHyperReverse 167
Strict Dimension Dominating are redefined to a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 168
Dominating” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define “Neutrosophic” version of 169
SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a 170
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating more understandable. Assume a 171
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if 172
the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 173
Dominating, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 174
SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic 175
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar”, 176
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and 177
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table holds. A SuperHyperGraph has 178
a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” where it’s the strongest [the 179
maximum Neutrosophic value from all the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating amid 180
the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices from a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 181
Dominating .] SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating . A graph is a SuperHyperUniform if 182
it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 183
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some SuperHyperClasses as 184
follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 185
SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s 186
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges; it’s 187
SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all SuperHyperEdges; 188
it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 189
SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has no 190
SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 191
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi 192
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a SuperHyperWheel if it’s only 193
one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex 194
has one SuperHyperEdge with any common SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel 195
proposes the specific designs and the specific architectures. The SuperHyperModel is 196
officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this 197
SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are 198
SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the common and intended properties 199
between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as 200
“SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some degrees of determinacy, 201
indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise SuperHyperModel which in this case 202
the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In the future research, the foundation 203
will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the results and the definitions will be 204
introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the cancer in the long-term function. 205
The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and 206
the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the 207
move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, 208
indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that 209
region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Neutrosophic 210
SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 211
There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and 212
some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves and the traces of the cancer 213
on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 214
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 215
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 216
The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating or the 217
strongest SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in those Neutrosophic 218
SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, called 219
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and the strongest SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 220
Dominating, called Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, some general 221
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths 222
have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least 223
three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 224
There isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating but literarily, 225
it’s the deformation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. It, literarily, deforms 226
and it doesn’t form. A basic familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 227
Dimension Dominating theory, SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 228
theory are proposed. 229
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 230
, Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition

Dominating 231
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 232
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 233
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 234
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 235
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 236
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 237
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 238
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 239
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 240
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 241
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 242
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 243
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 244
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 245
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 246
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 247
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 248
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 249
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 250
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 251
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 252
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 253
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 254
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 255
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 256
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 257
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 258
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 259
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 260
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 261
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 262
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 263
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 264
formally called “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” in the themes of jargons and 265
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 266
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in 267
the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 268
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 269
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 270
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 271
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 272
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 273
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 274
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 275
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 276
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 277
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 278
The aim is to find either the optimal SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating or the 279
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in those Neutrosophic 280
SuperHyperModels. Some general results are introduced. Beyond that in 281
SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath s have only two 282
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 283
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. There 284
isn’t any formation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating but literarily, it’s the 285
deformation of any SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. It, literarily, deforms and it 286
doesn’t form. 287
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 288
find the “ amount of SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” of either individual of cells or 289
the groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the 290
“amount of SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” based on the fixed groups of cells or the 291
fixed groups of group of cells? 292
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 293
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 294
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 295
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 296
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 297
Dimension Dominating” on “SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then 298
the research has taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some 299
connections amid this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates 300
us to get some instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of 301
this research. The general results and some results about some connections are some 302
avenues to make key point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more 303
understandable and more clear. 304
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 305
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 306
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 307
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 308
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 309
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 310
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 311
Dominating and Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, are figured out in 312
sections “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 313
Strict Dimension Dominating”. In the sense of tackling on getting results and in Reverse Strict 314
Dimension Dominating to make sense about continuing the research, the ideas of 315
SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their 316
consequences, corresponded SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in 317
this section, titled “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 318
SuperHyperClasses”. As going back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps 319
toward the common notions to extend the new notions in new frameworks, 320
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on 321
SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter 322
research about the general SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section 323
of theoretical research are contained in the section “General Results”. Some general 324
SuperHyperRelations are fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental 325
SuperHyperNotions as elicited and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ 326
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 327
Dominating”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic 328
SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s done about the 329
SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and going to figure 330
out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as presented in 331
section, “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating”. The keyword of this research debut 332
in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and subsections 333
“Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as SuperHyperModel” and 334
“Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. 335
In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s 336
done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of “questions” and “problems” 337
to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. The advantages and the 338
limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this research to make sense 339
and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the section, “Conclusion and 340
Closing Remarks”. 341
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 342
Research On the Redeemed Ways 343
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 344
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 345
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.5,p.2), 346
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 347
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 348
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 349
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [1],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 350
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 351
(Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 352
to Ref. [229]. 353
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 354
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 355
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.1,p.1). 356
Let X be a Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating of points (objects) with generic elements in X
denoted by x; then the Neutrosophic set A (NS A) is an object having the form
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}

+
where the functions T, I, F : X →]− 0, 1 [ define respectively the a
truth-membership function, an indeterminacy-membership function, and a
falsity-membership function of the element x ∈ X to the set A with the condition
−
0 ≤ TA (x) + IA (x) + FA (x) ≤ 3+ .
The functions TA (x), IA (x) and FA (x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets of 357
+
]− 0, 1 [. 358
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2). 359
Let X be a Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating of points (objects) with generic elements in X
denoted by x. A single valued Neutrosophic set A (SVNS A) is characterized by
truth-membership function TA (x), an indeterminacy-membership function IA (x), and a
falsity-membership function FA (x). For each point x in X, TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) ∈ [0, 1].
A SVNS A can be written as
A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}.
Definition 3.3. The degree of truth-membership,

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

and FA (X) = min[FA (vi ), FA (vj )]vi ,vj ∈X .
Definition 3.4. The support of X ⊂ A of the single valued Neutrosophic set

A = {< x : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) >, x ∈ X}:
supp(X) = {x ∈ X : TA (x), IA (x), FA (x) > 0}.
Definition 3.5 (Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). (Ref. [1],Definition 360
2.5,p.2). 361
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 362
pair S = (V, E), where 363
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 364
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 365
1, 2, . . . , n); 366
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 367
V; 368
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 369
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 370
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 371
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 372
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 373
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 374
(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 . 375
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 376
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 377
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 378
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 379
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 380
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 381
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 382
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 383
the ii0 th element of the Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating of Neutrosophic 384
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 385
and E are crisp sets. 386
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 387
(Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3). 388
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 389
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 390
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 391
characterized as follow-up items. 392
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 393
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 394
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 395
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 396
HyperEdge; 397
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 398
SuperEdge; 399
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 400
SuperHyperEdge. 401
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 402
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 403
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3). 404
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 405
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 406
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 407
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 408
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 409
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 410
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)). 411
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 412
pair S = (V, E), where 413
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 414
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 415
1, 2, . . . , n); 416
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 417
V; 418
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 419
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 420
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 421
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 422
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 423
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 424
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 425
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 426
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 427
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 428
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 429
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 430
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 431
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 432
the ii0 th element of the Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating of Neutrosophic 433
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 434
and E are crisp sets. 435
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 436
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 438
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 439
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 440
characterized as follow-up items. 441
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 442
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 443
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 444
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 445
HyperEdge; 446
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 447
SuperEdge; 448
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 449
SuperHyperEdge. 450
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 451
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 452
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 453
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 454
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 455
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 456
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 457
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 458
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 459
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 460
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 461
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 462
given SuperHyperEdges; 463
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 464
SuperHyperEdges; 465
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 466
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 467
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 468
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 469
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 470
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 471
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 472
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 473
common SuperVertex. 474
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 475
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 476
of following conditions hold: 477
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 478
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 479
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 480
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 481
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 482
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 483
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 484
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 485
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 486
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 487
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 488
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. 489
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 490
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 491
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 492
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 493
SuperHyperPath . 494
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 495
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 497
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 498
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 499
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 500
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 501
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 502
(NSHE)). (Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). 503
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 504
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 505
(ix) Neutrosophic t-Connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 506
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 507
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 508
(x) Neutrosophic i-Connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 509
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 510
(xi) Neutrosophic f-Connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 512
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 513
(xii) Neutrosophic Connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 515
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 516
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 517
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 518
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 519
).
Dimension Dominating 520
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 522
either V 0 or E 0 is called 523
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the following 524
expression is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 525
criteria holds 526
0
∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the following 527
expression is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 528
Dominating criteria holds 529
0
∀Ea ∈ EN SHG , ∃Eb ∈ E : ∃Vc ∈ VN SHG , Vc ∈ Ea , Eb
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 530
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the following 531
expression is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 532
criteria holds 533

(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the following 534
expression is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 535
criteria holds 536

and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 537
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 538
re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict 540
Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 541
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating). 542
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 545
Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and 548
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 549
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 550
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 551
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 552
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 553
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 554
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 558
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 559
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 560
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 561
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 562
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 563
SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 564
Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 565
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 568
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 569
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme 570
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 571
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 573
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 574
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 575
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 579
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 580
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 581
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 582
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 583
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 584
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; and the 585
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 586
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 587
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 593
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 594
the Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 595
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 596
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 601
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 604
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 605
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 612
Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; and the Extreme power is 615
corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 616
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 617
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints
rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 621
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 624
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; and the 627
Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 628
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating). 629
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 630
(i) an δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is a Neutrosophic kind of 631
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating such that either of the 632
following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 633
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 634
|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 635
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 636
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is a 637
Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating such 638
that either of the following Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 639
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 640
|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. 641
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 642
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 643
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, there’s 644
a need to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 645
assign to the values. 648
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 649
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 650
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 651
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 652
understandable. 653

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 654
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 655
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 656
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 657
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 658
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 659
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 660
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 661
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 662
. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a

Strict Dimension Dominating 663
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating more Neutrosophicly 664
understandable. 665
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, there’s 666
a need to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 667
Dimension Dominating”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by 668
the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the 669
position of labels to assign to the values. 670
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. It’s redefined a 671
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the Table (3) holds. 672
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 673
As The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And 674
Super Forms 675
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 676
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A 678
of V is called Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of 679
V is called Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic 680
probability of A. 681
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 682
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. s Neutrosophic k-events 684
Ai , i ∈ I is called Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called 685
Neutrosophic s-independent criteria 686
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 687
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 688
criteria 689
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 690
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Any k-function Reverse Strict 692
Dimension Dominating like E is called Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 693
2-function Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating like E is called Neutrosophic Variable. 694
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 695
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 696
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has 698
a number is called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 699
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 700
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 701
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. A Neutrosophic number is called 703
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 704
Crossing criteria 705
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 706
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let m and n 707
propose special Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Then with m ≥ 4n, 708
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 709
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 710
Neutrosophic independently with probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating p := 4n/m, and 711
set H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 712
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: 713
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
714
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 715
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let P be a 716
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of 717
SuperHyperLines
√ in the plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 718
1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 719
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 720
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points 721
on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 722
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 723
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 724
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 725
2 3
again l < 32n /k . 726
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let P be a 728
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P 729
at unit SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 730
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 731
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Draw a 732
SuperHyperUnit SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the 733
Neutrosophic number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. 734
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 12 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
Then 735
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 736
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on 737
the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 738
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 739
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 740
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 741
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 742
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 743
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 744
4/3 4/3
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n + n < 5n . 745
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 746
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let X be a 747
nonnegative Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 748
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. 749
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 750
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let Xn be a 751
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 752
(Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 753
Proof. 754
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. A special 756
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 757
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. A special 759
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of 760
k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 761
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 762
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 763
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 764
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 765
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 766
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 767
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 768
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: 769
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 770
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 771
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 772
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 773
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 774
stability number at most k. 775
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 776
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has 778
a number is called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called 779
Neutrosophic Variance criteria 780
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let X be a 782
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 783
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let X be a 785
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 786
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
787
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let Xn be a 789
Neutrosophic Variable in a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 790
Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 791
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Set X := Xn and 793
t := |Ex(Xn )| in Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that 794
E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| 795
when Xn = 0. 796
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let 798
G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least 799
value of k for which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the 800
three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 801
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. As in the proof of 803
related Theorem, the result is straightforward. 804
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 806
and let f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 807
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 808
or 809
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 810
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The latter is 812
straightforward. 813
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 814
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let P be a monotone property 816
of SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). 817
Then a Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 818
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 819
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 820
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 821
S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 823
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 824
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 825
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Let F be a 827
nonempty balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 828
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 829
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 830
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The latter is 832
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 834
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 835
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 836
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is 837
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 838
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 839
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 840
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 841
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 842
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 843
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 844
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 845
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating =

{}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating =
{}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial
= 0z 0 .
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.3)
846
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 849
SuperHyperEdges but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms 850
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic 851
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is 852
Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it 853
as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is 854
excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 855

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

(16.3)
Neutrosophicly straightforward. 859

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

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

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

{EN SHG − {Ei }}.
= z 6−c .
{VN SHG − {Vi }}.
= z 7−c .
868

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

(16.3)
872

{EN SHG − {Ei }}.
= z 6−c .
{VN SHG − {Vi }}.
= z 7−c .
876

(16.3)

{E1 , E2 }.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V11 }}.
= z 3−a .
880

{E3i+1 , E23 }3i=0 .
= z 3−a .
{V3i+1 , V11 }3i=0 .
= z 3−a .
884

(16.3)

(16.3)
Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

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

{EN SHG − {E1 , E5 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V11 }}.
= z 3−a .
888

{EN SHG − {E1 , E6 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V5 }}.
= z 3−a .

Example (16.3)
892

{EN SHG − {E1 , E2 }}.
= z 2−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V5 }}.
= z 5−a .
896

Example (16.3)

{EN SHG − {E6 , E9 }}.
= z 2−a .
{VN SHG − {V1 , V5 }}.
= z 3−a .
900

{E2 }.
= z 3−a .
{V1 }.
= z 5−a .
904

Example (16.3)

Example (16.3)

Example (16.3)

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 3−a .
{V3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 3−a .
908

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 }.
= z 2−a .
912

Example (16.3)

{E3i+1 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 , V27 }.
= z 2−a .
916

{E3i+2 }1i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2 , V17 , V7 , V27 }.
= z 2−a .
920

Example (16.3)

Example (16.3)

Example (16.3)

{E3i+1 }3i=0 .
= z 2−a .
{V2i+1 }5i=0 .
= z 2−a .
924

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

Example (16.3)
928

{E2 }.
= z |1−a| .
{V1 }.
= z |5−a| .
932

Example (16.3)

Example (16.3)

{E2i+3 }1i=0 .
= z 1−a .
{V1 , V10 , V6 }.
= z 4−a .
936
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 937
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 938
Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating if for any of them, and any of other 939
corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic 940
SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no 941
Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any 942
amount of them. 943
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 944
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 945
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 946
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating minus all Neutrosophic 947
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 948
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 949
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 950
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 951
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 Dimension Dominating is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict 952
Dimension Dominating is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 953
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of 954
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 955
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 956
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 957
in some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 958
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 959
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension 960
Dominating. 961
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating has, the least
Neutrosophic cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic
cardinality, is the Neutrosophic cardinality of
V \ V \ {aE , bE 0 , cE 00 , cE 000 }E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
If there’s a Neutrosophic type-result-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating with the least 962
Neutrosophic cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 963
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 964
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 965
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominating

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominating = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. In other words, the least 966
cardinality, the lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-Reverse 967
Strict Dimension Dominating is the cardinality of 968

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominating = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP 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
Dimension Dominating since neither amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges nor amount of
SuperHyperVertices where amount refers to the Neutrosophic number of

SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges) more than one to form any kind of
SuperHyperEdges or any number of SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
V \V \{aE , bE , cE , . . . , aE 0 , bE 0 , cE 0 , . . .}E,E 0 ={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices has the

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

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

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the
generality of the connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. Thus if we
assume in the worst case, literally,
V \ V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
Is a quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating is the
cardinality of
Then we’ve lost some connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of the

connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs titled free-triangle, on-triangle, and
their quasi-types but the SuperHyperStable is only up in this quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension
Dominating. It’s the contradiction to that fact on the generality. There are some
counterexamples to deny this statement. One of them comes from the setting of the
graph titled path and cycle as the counterexamples-classes or reversely direction star as
the examples-classes, are well-known classes in that setting and they could be
considered as the examples-classes and counterexamples-classes for the tight bound of
Let V \ V \ {z} in mind. There’s no necessity on the SuperHyperEdge since we need at 969
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 970
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 971
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 972
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 973
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 974
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 975
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 976
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating

decorates the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Neutrosophic
connections so as this Neutrosophic style implies different versions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEdges with the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality in the terms of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The lower Neutrosophic bound is to
have the maximum Neutrosophic groups of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices have
perfect Neutrosophic connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges and the outside of
this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the connectedness of the
used Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph arising from its Neutrosophic properties taken
from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, then there’s no
Neutrosophic connection. Furthermore, the Neutrosophic existence of one Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertex has no Neutrosophic effect to talk about the Neutrosophic R-Reverse
Strict Dimension Dominating. Since at least two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices involve to
make a title in the Neutrosophic background of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph.

The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge but at least two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices make the
Neutrosophic version of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Neutrosophic
setting of non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is
used as Neutrosophic adjective for the initial Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, induces
there’s no Neutrosophic appearance of the loop Neutrosophic version of the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and this Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is said to be
loopless. The Neutrosophic adjective “loop” on the basic Neutrosophic framework
engages one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex but it never happens in this Neutrosophic
setting. With these Neutrosophic bases, on a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, there’s
at least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at least a Neutrosophic R-Reverse
Strict Dimension Dominating has the Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating has the

Neutrosophic cardinality at least a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Assume a
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet isn’t a
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating since either the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph is an obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel thus it never happens
since there’s no Neutrosophic usage of this Neutrosophic framework and even more
there’s no Neutrosophic connection inside or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph isn’t
obvious and as its consequences, there’s a Neutrosophic contradiction with the term
“Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” since the maximum Neutrosophic
cardinality never happens for this Neutrosophic style of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no Neutrosophic connection inside as mentioned
in first Neutrosophic case in the forms of drawback for this selected Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Neutrosophic case implies having the Neutrosophic style of
on-quasi-triangle Neutrosophic style on the every Neutrosophic elements of this
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Precisely, the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that
some Neutrosophic amount of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are
on-quasi-triangle Neutrosophic style. The Neutrosophic cardinality of the v
SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet

But the lower Neutrosophic bound is up. Thus the minimum Neutrosophic cardinality
of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality ends up the Neutrosophic discussion. The
first Neutrosophic term refers to the Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperGraph but this key point is enough since there’s a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperClass of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has no on-quasi-triangle
Neutrosophic style amid some amount of its Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. This
Neutrosophic setting of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel proposes a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet has only some amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from one
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge such that there’s no Neutrosophic amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges more than one involving these some amount of these
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The Neutrosophic cardinality of this Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet is the maximum and the Neutrosophic case is occurred in the minimum
Neutrosophic situation. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
Has the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality such that
Contains some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

distinct-covers-order-amount Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges for amount of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices taken from the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet
It means that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices
Is a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 977
as used Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case 978
and the common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific 979
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are 980
Neutrosophic free-quasi-triangle. 981
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 Dimension Dominating. Those Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-Reverse Strict
Dimension Dominating. Formally, consider
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
Are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z.
where the ∼ isn’t an equivalence relation but only the symmetric relation on the
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The formal
definition is as follows.
Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z
if and only if Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices and there’s only and
only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) between the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices Zi and Zj . The other definition for the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) in the terms of Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension
Dominating is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension
Dominating but with slightly differences in the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality amid
those Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices.

Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Neutrosophic cardinality ,

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension

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

Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 982
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating =

E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
983
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating =

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

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic
intended SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating,
Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) could be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, then the
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict 984
Dimension Dominating is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 985
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 986
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 987
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 988
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension 989
Dominating in some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 990
with the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 991
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension 992
Dominating. 993
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 994
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 995
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 996
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 997
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 998
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 999
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 1000
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 1001
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 1002
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 1003
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 1004
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 1005
where the Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus 1006
it’s, literarily, a Neutrosophic embedded R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The 1007
SuperHyperNotions of embedded SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In 1008
the original setting, these types of SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum 1009
SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the embedded setting is elected such that those 1010
SuperHyperSets have the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re 1011
Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic 1012
SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded 1013
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The interior types of the Neutrosophic 1014
SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the Neutrosophic number of 1015
SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior Neutrosophic 1016
SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more formal, the 1017
perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any distinct 1018
types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension 1019
Dominating. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one 1020
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation with the 1021
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. In 1022
the embedded Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, there’s the usage of exterior 1023
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more than 1024
outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One 1025
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic 1026
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement 1027
has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic 1028
R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating with the 1029
exclusion of the exclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic 1030
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 1031
with the inclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic 1032
SuperHyperEdge, is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. To sum them 1033
up, in a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1034
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the 1035
maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of 1036
any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating minus all Neutrosophic 1037
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only 1038
an unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 1039
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension 1040
Dominating, minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of 1041
them. 1042
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating has two titles. 1043
a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating and its corresponded quasi-maximum 1044
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 1045
any Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 1046
with that quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the 1047
embedded Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1048
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1049
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominatings for all 1050
Neutrosophic numbers less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The 1051
essence of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ends up but this essence starts 1052
up in the terms of the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, again and more 1053
in the operations of collecting all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominatings 1054
acted on the all possible used formations of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to 1055
achieve one Neutrosophic number. This Neutrosophic number is 1056
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension 1057
Dominatings. Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and 1058
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1059
SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Then 1060
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension 1061
Dominating is re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1062
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1063
technical definition for the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1064
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating =

{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number |
= max zNeutrosophic Number }.
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Neutrosophic 1065
Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating poses the upcoming expressions. 1066

{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1067

= max zNeutrosophic Number
[zNeutrosophic
Number ]Neutrosophic Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1068


To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1069
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic

1070

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

1071


1072


Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1073
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1074
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1075
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1076
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” but, precisely, it’s 1077
the generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” since 1078
“Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” happens “Neutrosophic Reverse Strict 1079
Dimension Dominating” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1080
background but “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens 1081
“Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial 1082
framework and preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the 1083
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, 1084
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Neutrosophic Quasi-Reverse Strict Dimension 1085
Dominating”, and “Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” are up. 1086
Thus, let 1087
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1088
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1089
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating and the new 1090
terms are up. 1091
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1092

{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1093

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1094

And with go back to initial structure, 1095
GNeutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic

1096

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1097


1098


Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1099
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-Reverse Strict 1100
Dimension Dominating if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic 1101
SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually 1102
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all 1103
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1104
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1105
are coming up. 1106
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

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

Dominating. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1107
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1108
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1109
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1110
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1111
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating is related to the Neutrosophic

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension
Dominating is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes

only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
doesn’t have less than two SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far an SuperHyperEdge. Thus the
non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict
Dimension Dominating is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1112
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1113
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1114
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1115
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating and it’s an 1116
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Since it’s 1117
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 Dimension
Dominating. There isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the
intended Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1118
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1119
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1120
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1121
“Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating” 1122
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1123
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 1124
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 Dimension Dominating
amid those obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic Reverse
Strict Dimension Dominating, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1125
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 Dimension Dominating. In other words, the least cardinality,
the lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension
Dominating is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1126
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1127
quasi-R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 1128
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 1129
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 1130
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1131
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1132
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1133
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1134
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1135
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1136
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1137
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 1138
Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1139
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1140
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1141
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1142
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1143
R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Since it doesn’t have 1144
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1146
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1147
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1148
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1149
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Since it doesn’t do the 1150
Neutrosophic procedure such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to 1151
have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one 1152
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected 1153
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1154
titled its Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in 1155
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. 1156
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic 1157
SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. 1158
Thus the obvious Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, VESHE is up. The obvious 1159
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension 1160
Dominating, VESHE , is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all 1161
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled 1162
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1163
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1164
SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1165
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1166
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1167
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1168
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1169
Neutrosophic R-Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1170
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1171
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1172
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1173
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1174
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1175
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1176
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating, is up. There’s neither 1177
empty SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1178
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1179
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The 1180
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1181

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominating = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−ReverseStrictDimensionDominatingSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension 1182
Dominating. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1183
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1184

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1185
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1186
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1188
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1189
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1190
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1191
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension 1192
Dominating is up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1193
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes 1194
only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of 1195
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1196

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 1197
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1198
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic 1199
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1200

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 1201
. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1203

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1204
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1205
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1206
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic 1207
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating and it’s an 1208
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Since it’s 1209
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1211
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1212
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1213
There aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1214
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1215

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

Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 1216

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 1217
, not:

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1219

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 1220
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1221
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1222
“Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating ” 1223
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1224
Neutrosophic Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating , 1225
is only and only 1226

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1227
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1228
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1229
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1230
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1231
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1232
Then 1233

|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 1234
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1235
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in the Example (16.5)
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1236
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1237
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 1238
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1239
Dominating. The latter is straightforward. 1240
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1241
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1242
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1243
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1244
Then 1245

|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 1246
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1247
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1248
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1249

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1253
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1254
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1255
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1257
Then 1258

{EN SHG − {E1 , E2 }}.
= z 3−a .
{VN SHG − {ViIN T ERN AL , CEN T ER}}.
= z 3−a .
Proof. Let 1259
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

(16.7)
1260
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1261
There’s a new way to redefine as 1262

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1266
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1267
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1268
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1269
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 1270
Dimension Dominating. 1271
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1272
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1273

{EN SHG − {EPi , EPj }i6=j }.
= z b−a .
{VN SHG − {VPi , VPj }i6=j }.
= z b−a .
Proof. Let 1274
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1275
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1276
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1277

Dominating. The latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperReverse 1280
Strict Dimension Dominating. Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions 1281
based on SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating could be applied. There are only two 1282
SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the 1283
representative in the 1284
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1285
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1286
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1287
solution 1288
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1289
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1290
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1291
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1292
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1293
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1294
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1295
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1296
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1297

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

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in the Example
(16.11)
Proof. Let 1298
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
1299
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 1301

Dominating. The latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperReverse 1304
Strict Dimension Dominating. Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions 1305
based on SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating could be applied. There are only z 0 1306
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in the Example (16.13)
SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the 1307
representative in the 1308
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1309
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1310
solution 1312
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1314
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1315
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1316
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1317
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1318
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1319
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1320
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1321
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1322

|E |
{E3i+2 }i=0ESHP ∪ E ∗ .
| min |E | |Ei |
{E3i+2 } ESHP ∪E ∗
=z i=0 .
|E |
EXT ERN AL
{V2i+2 }i=0ESHP ∪ V ∗ .
| min |E | |Vi |
{V EXT ERN AL } ESHP ∪V ∗
=z 2i+2 i=0 .
Proof. Let 1323
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1324
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1326

Dominating. The latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperReverse Strict 1329
Dimension Dominating. Thus the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based 1330
on SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating could be applied. The unique embedded 1331
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating proposes some longest SuperHyperReverse Strict 1332
Dimension Dominating excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1333
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1335
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1336
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1337
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1338
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1340
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1341
For the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 1342
Dimension Dominating, and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, some 1343
general results are introduced. 1344
Figure 28. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel Neutrosophic Associated to the Neu-

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in the Neutro-
sophic Example (16.15)
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is 1345
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1346
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. Then 1347
N eutrosophic SuperHyperReverseStrictDimensionDominating =
{theSuperHyperReverseStrictDimensionDominatingof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperReverseStrictDimensionDominating
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperReverseStrictDimensionDominating. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1348
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1349
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1350
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1351
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and 1352
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating coincide. 1353
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1355
Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if and only if it’s a SuperHyperReverse Strict 1356
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1359
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperReverse Strict 1360
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1362
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1363
Dominating is its SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and reversely. 1364
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1365
, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite,

Dominating 1366
SuperHyperWheel) on the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic 1367
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is its SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and 1368
reversely. 1369
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1370
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse 1371
Strict Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined. 1372
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1373
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1374
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined. 1375
Corollary 6.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict 1376

SuperHyperWheel). Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating isn’t 1378
well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating isn’t well-defined. 1379
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1380
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict 1381
Dimension Dominating is well-defined. 1382
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1383
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is well-defined if and only if 1384
its SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is well-defined. 1385
Corollary 6.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict 1386

SuperHyperWheel). Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is 1388
well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating is well-defined. 1389
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1390
is 1391
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1392
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1393
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1394
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1395
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1396
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1397
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1398
∅ is 1399
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1400
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1401
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1402
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1403
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1404
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1405
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1406
independent SuperHyperSet is 1407
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1408
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1409
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1410
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1411
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1412
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1413
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1414
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating/SuperHyperPath. Then 1415
V is a maximal 1416
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1417
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1418
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1419
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1420
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1421
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1422
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1423
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1424
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1425
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1426
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1427
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1428
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1429
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1430
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1431
Dominating; 1432
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1433
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating/SuperHyperPath. Then 1435
the number of 1436
(i) : the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1437
(ii) : the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1438
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1439
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1440
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1441
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1442
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1443
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1444
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1446
(i) : the dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1447
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1448
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1449
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1450
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1451
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1452
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1453
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1456
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1457
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1458
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1459
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1463
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1464
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1465
Dominating. 1466
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1469
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1470
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1471
is a 1472
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1476
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1477
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1478
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1481
number of 1482
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1486
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1487
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1488
Dominating. 1489
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1490
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1491
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1492
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1494
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1495
(iv) : SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1499
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1500
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1501
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1502
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1503
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1504
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1505
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1506
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1510
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1511
Dominating; 1512
(vi) : connected ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

Dominating. 1514
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1516
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1517
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1521
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1522
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1523
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1525
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1527
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1528
of a dual 1529
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1533
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1534
Dominating; 1535
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1536
Dominating. 1537
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1539
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1540
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1541
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1545
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

Dominating; 1547
(vi) : connected ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

Dominating. 1549
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1550
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1551
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1552
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1553
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1554
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1555
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, then 1556
∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such that 1557
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1558
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1559
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1560
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, then 1561
(i) S is SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating set; 1562
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1563
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1564
Then 1565
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1566
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1567
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1568
which is connected. Then 1569
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1570
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1571
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1572
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1573
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1574
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1575
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1576
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1577
a dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1578
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1579
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict 1580
Dimension Dominating; 1581
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1582
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1583
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1584
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1585
dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1586
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1587
Then 1588
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1589
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1591
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1592
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1593
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1594
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1596
Then 1597
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1598
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1600
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1601
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1602
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1604
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1605
(ii) Γ = 1; 1606
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1607
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1608
Dominating. 1609
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1610
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1611
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1612
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1613
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1614
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1615
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1616
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1617
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1618
Strict Dimension Dominating; 1619
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1620
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1621
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1622
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1624
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1
2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1625
Strict Dimension Dominating; 1626
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1627
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 1628
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1629
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1631
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1632
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1633
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating for N SHF; 1634
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1635
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1636
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1637
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E). 1638
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1639
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1640
SuperHyperSet. Then 1641
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1642
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating for N SHF; 1643
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1644

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1645
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Strict 1646
Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E). 1647
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1648
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1649
SuperHyperSet. Then 1650
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse 1651
Strict Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E); 1652
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1653

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1654
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperReverse Strict 1655
Dimension Dominating for N SHF : (V, E). 1656
Then following statements hold; 1658
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1659
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, then S is an 1660
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1661
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1662
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, then S is a dual 1663
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1664
Then following statements hold; 1666
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1667
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, then S is an 1668
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1669
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1670
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, then S is a dual 1671
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1672
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1673
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1674
statements hold; 1675
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1676
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1677
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1678
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1680
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1682
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1683
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1684
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1685
statements hold; 1686
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1687
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1689
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1691
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1693
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1694
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1696
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1697
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1698
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1700
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1702
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1705
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1707
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1708
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1709
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1711
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1713
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; 1714
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1716
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperReverse 1718
Strict Dimension Dominating. Then following statements hold; 1719
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1720
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1722
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1724
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1727
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is SuperHyperReverse 1729
Strict Dimension Dominating. Then following statements hold; 1730
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1731
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1733
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1735
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. 1738
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1739
Neutrosophic Recognition 1740
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1741
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1742
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1743
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1744
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1745
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1746
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1747
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1748
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1749
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1750
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1751
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1752
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1753
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1754
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1755
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1756
happened and what’s done. 1757
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1758
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1759
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1760
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1761
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, 1762
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, 1763
SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 1764
Strict Dimension Dominating or the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating in 1765
those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. 1766
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1767
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1768
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1769
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1770
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1771
featured. 1772
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1773
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1774
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1775
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1776
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the 1777
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (29), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict 1778
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

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

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1780
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1781
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1782
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1783
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1784
Neutrosophic featured. 1785
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1786
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1787
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1788
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1789
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1790
SuperHyperModel (30), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1791
Dominating. 1792
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1793
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1794
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1795
The SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse 1796
Figure 30. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating
Strict Dimension Dominating are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s 1797
Recognitions”. 1798
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1799
recognitions? 1800
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperReverse Strict 1801
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating?

Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1803
compute them? 1804
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1805
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1806
Dominating? 1807
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating and the Neutrosophic 1808
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions 1809
and they’re based on SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, are there else? 1810
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1811
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1812
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1813
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1814
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1815
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1816
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1817
highlighted. 1818
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1819
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1820
SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. For that sake in the second definition, the main 1821
definition of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the 1822
alphabets. Based on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the 1823
new SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, finds the 1824
convenient background to implement some results based on that. Some 1825
SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this 1826
research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to 1827
recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To 1828
formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 1829
Dominating, the new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some 1830
general results are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 1831
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. The clarifications, 1832
instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In this research, the 1833
literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and the results. The 1834
SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on 1835
the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background of this research. 1836
Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, groups of cells and 1837
embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes some 1838
SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the longest 1839
and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are formally 1840
called “ SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating” in the themes of jargons and buzzwords. 1841
The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to figure out the 1842
background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and avenues for this
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1843
research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1844
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1845
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1846
Forms 1847
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1848
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1852
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1853
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1854
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1855
|Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1856
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1857
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1858
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1859
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1860
|Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1861
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1862
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1863
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1864
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1865
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1868
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1870
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1871
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1872
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1873
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1875
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1876
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1880
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1883
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1884
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1885
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1886
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1887
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 1888
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 1889
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 1890
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1892
Extreme coefficient; 1893
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1894
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1895
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1897
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1898
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1899
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1900
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 1901
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1903
Neutrosophic coefficient; 1904
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1905
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1910
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1912
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1913
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 1917
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1920
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1921
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1926
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 1927
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1929
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1931
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1937
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1940
Neutrosophic coefficient. 1941
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1945
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1946
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1947
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1948
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1949
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1950
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1951
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1952
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 1955
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1956
SuperHyperDuality. 1961


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 2024
ESHP : (V, E). Then 2025
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 2026
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 2030
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 2034
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 2035
ESHC : (V, E). Then 2036
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 2037
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2048
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 2049
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2059
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 2062
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 2067
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2068
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2069
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2070
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2071
solution 2074
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2081

= {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 2084
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2085

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2091
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2096
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2104
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 2106
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 2107
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 2108
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2109

∃!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 2114
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2115
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2122
Forms 2124
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2125
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2129
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2130
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2131
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2132
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2134
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2135
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2136
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2137
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2139
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2140
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2141
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2142
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2145
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2146
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2147
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 2148
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2149
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2150
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2152
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2153
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2155
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 2156
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2160
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2161
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2162
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2163
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2164
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2169
coefficient; 2170
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2171
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 2174
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 2175
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 2176
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2180
coefficient; 2181
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2182
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2185
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2186
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2187
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2189
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2190
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2197
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2198
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2206
coefficient; 2207
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2208
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2217
coefficient. 2218
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2222
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2223
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2224
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2225
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2226
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2227
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 2228
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 2229
SuperHyperJoin. 2230
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 2304
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2308
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2312

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

.
Proof. Let 2315
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2326
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 2327

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2337
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 2340
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 2345
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2346
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2347
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2349
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2350
solution 2352
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2359

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 2362
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2363

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2367
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2368
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2369
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2374
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2382

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

.
Proof. Let 2385
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2386

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2390
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2391
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2392
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2393
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2400
Forms 2402
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2403
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2407
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2408
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2409
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2410
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2412
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2413
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2414
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2415
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2417
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2418
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2419
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2420
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2423
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2425
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2428
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2430
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2431
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2438
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2439
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2440
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2441
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2447
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2449
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2450
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2455
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2458
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2460
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2465
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2467
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2468
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2475
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2476
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2484
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2486
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2492
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2495
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2500
SuperHyperPerfect. 2508
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 2582
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2586
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2590
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 2593
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2604
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2605

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2615
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 2618
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 2623
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2624
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2625
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2626
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2627
solution 2630
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2637

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 2640
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2641

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2645
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2646
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2647
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2652
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2660
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2663

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2664

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2668
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2669
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2670
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2671
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2678
Forms 2680
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2681
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2685
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2686
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2687
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2688
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2690
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2691
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2692
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2693
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2695
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2696
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2697
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2698
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2701
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2703
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2706
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2708
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2709
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2711
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2716
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2717
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2718
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2725
coefficient; 2726
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2727
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2736
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2738
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2743
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2745
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2746
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2753
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2754
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2762
coefficient; 2763
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2764
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2773
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2778
SuperHyperTotal. 2786
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 2860
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2864
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2868
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 2871
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 2882
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 2883
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2893
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 2896
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2901
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2902
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2905
solution 2908
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2915

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 2918
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2919

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2923
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2924
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2930
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2938
∗
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 2941
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2942

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2946
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2947
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2948
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2949
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2956
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2957
Forms 2958
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2959
SuperHyperConnected). 2960
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2964
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2965
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2966
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2967
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2968
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2969
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2971
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2972
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2973
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2974
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2975
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2976
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2978
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2979
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2980
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2981
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2984
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2986
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2989
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2991
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2992
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2996
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2999
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 3000
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 3001
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 3002
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 3003
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 3004
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 3005
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 3006
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 3007
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 3008
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 3009
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3010
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 3011
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 3012
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3013
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 3016
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3019
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 3020
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 3021
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 3026
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 3027
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 3028
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 3029
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3033
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 3036
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3037
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 3040
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 3043
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 3046
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3048
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3051
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3054
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3057
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3058
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3062
SuperHyperConnected. 3070
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 3144
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 3148
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3152
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 3155
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 3166
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 3167
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3177
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3180
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3185
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3186
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3189
solution 3192
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3199
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 3202
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3207
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3208
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3214
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3222
∗
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 3225
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3227

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3230
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3231
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3232
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3233
17 Background 3241
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3242
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3243
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “New Ideas In Recognition of 3244
Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot” in Ref. [1] 3245
by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3246
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms with 3247
introducing used neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published 3248
in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Current Trends in Mass Communication 3249
(CTMC)” with ISO abbreviation “Curr Trends Mass Comm” in volume 2 and issue 1 3250
with pages 32-55. 3251
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3252
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3253
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3254
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3255
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3256
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3257
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3258
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3259
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3260
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3261
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3262
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3263
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3264
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3265
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3266
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3267
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3268
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3269
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3270
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3271
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3272
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3273
SuperHyperNumbers. 3274
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3275
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction to Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3276
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Beyond ” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). 3277
In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and 3278
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3279
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3280
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3281
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3282
Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 6 with pages 221-307. The research article studies 3283
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 3284
It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and 3285
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is 3286
titled “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super 3287
Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper 3288
Classes” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research article, a novel approach 3289
is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on 3290
fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of 3291
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3292
entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3293
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3294
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3296
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3297
SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled 3298
“neutrosophic co-degree and neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the 3299
setting of some classes related to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry 3300
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3301
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without 3302
using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3303
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer 3304
Science Research (JCTCSR)” with ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in 3305
choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3307
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background. The research 3308
article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic 3309
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3310
background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing 3311
Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3312
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3313
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett 3314
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3315
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3316
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3317
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3318
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [10] by 3319
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3320
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3321
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3322
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3323
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3324
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [12] by Henry 3325
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3326
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3327
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3328
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3329
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3330
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3331
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3332
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3333
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3334
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3335
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3336
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3337
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3338
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3339
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3340
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett 3341
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3342
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3343
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3344
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3345
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3346
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3347
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [21] by 3348
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3349
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [22] by 3350
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3351
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3352
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3353
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3354
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3355
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3356
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3357
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3358
Treatments” in Ref. [25] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3359
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3360
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [26] by Henry Garrett 3361
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3362
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [199] by Henry 3363
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3364
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3365
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [200] by Henry Garrett 3366
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3367
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3368
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [201] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3369
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3370
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3371
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [202] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3372
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3373
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [205] by 3374
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3375
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3376
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [206] by Henry 3377
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3378
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3379
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [209] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3380
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3381
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [212] by Henry 3382
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3383
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3384
in Ref. [213] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3385
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3386
Ref. [214] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3387
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3388
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [215] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3389
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3390
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [216] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3391
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3392
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [217] by Henry Garrett 3393
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3394
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [228] by Henry 3395
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3396
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3397
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [229] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–229], there 3398
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3399
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3400
at [230–357]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3401
readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [358, 359]. 3402
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3403
proposed as book in Ref. [358] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3404
Scholar and has more than 4728 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3405
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3406
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3407
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3408
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3409
proposed as book in Ref. [359] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3410
Scholar and has more than 5721 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3411
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3412
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3413
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3414
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3415
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3416
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3417
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3418
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3419
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–229] 3420
alongside scientific research books at [230–357]. Two popular scientific research books 3421
in Scribd ,in the terms of high readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic 3422
science is on [358, 359]. 3423
References 3424
1. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3425
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Curr Trends Mass Comm 3426
2(1) (2023) 32-55. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/new- 3427
ideas-in-recognition-of-cancer-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-as-hyper- 3428
tool-on-super-toot.pdf) 3429
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3430
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3431
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3432
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3433
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3434
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3435
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3436
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3437
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3438
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3439
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3440
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3441
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3442
SuperHyperFunction to Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3443
Neutrosophic Recognition and Beyond ”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(6) 3444
(2023) 221-307. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access- 3445
articles/neutrosophic-1failed-superhyperforcing-in-the-superhyperfunction-to- 3446
use-neutrosophic-superhypergraphs-on-cancers-neutros.pdf) 3447
5. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3448
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3449
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. (doi: 3450
10.33140/JCTCSR.02.01.04) 3451
6. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3452
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3453
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3454
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3455
7. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3456
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3457
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3458
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3459
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3460
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3461
8. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3462
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3463
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3464
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3465
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3466
9. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3467
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3468
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3469
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3470
10. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3471
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3472
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3473
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3474
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3475
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3476
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3477
12. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3478
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3479
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3480
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3481
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3482
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3483
13. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3484
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3485
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3486
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3487
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3488
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3489
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3490
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3491
15. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3492
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3493
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3494
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3495
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3496
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3497
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3498
17. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3499
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3500
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3501
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3502
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3504
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3505
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3506
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3507
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3508
20. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3509
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3510
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3512
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3516
22. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3517
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3518
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3519
23. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3520
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3521
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3522
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3523
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3524
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3525
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3526
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3527
25. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3528
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3529
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3530
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3531
26. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3532
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3533
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3534
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3535
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3537
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8088438). 3538
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Unequal 3539
Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3540
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8088387). 3541
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3543
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8084436). 3544
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Strict 3545
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super 3549
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080100). 3550
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse Strict 3551
Connective In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3552
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080068). 3553
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3555
Super Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8078445). 3556
34. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Unequal 3557
Connective Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3558
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3561
36. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Strict 3563
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3567
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8072171). 3568
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Reverse 3569
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3573
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Equal 3575
SuperHyperGraph By Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3579
42. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Dimension 3581
Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3582
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3585
44. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse 3587
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3591
46. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Equal 3593
SuperHyperGraph By Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On Super 3597
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8051346). 3598
48. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Connective 3599
SuperHyperGraph By United Dominating As Hyper Ultra On Super Units”, 3603
50. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Units By Hyper Ultra Of United 3605
SuperHyperGraph By Zero Forcing As Hyper ford On Super forceps”, Zenodo 3609
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8017246). 3610
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super forceps By Hyper ford Of Zero Forcing In 3611
Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3612
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020128). 3613
SuperHyperGraph By Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super matte”, Zenodo 3615
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978571). 3616
54. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super mat By Hyper matte Of Matrix-Based In 3617
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3618
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978857). 3619
SuperHyperGraph By Dominating-Edges As Hyper Dome On Super Eddy”, 3621
56. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Dome Of 3623
Dominating-Edges In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3624
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab”, Zenodo 2023, 3627
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595). 3628
58. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gab By Hyper Gape Of Edge-Gap In 3629
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923632). 3631
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3633
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3634
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3635
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3636
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3639
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3640
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3641
62. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3642
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3643
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3644
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3645
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3647
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3648
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3650
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3653
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3656
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3659
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3660
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3662
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3665
70. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3667
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3668
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3671
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3674
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3677
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3678
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3680
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3683
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3684
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3686
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3689
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3692
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3695
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3698
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3701
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3702
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3704
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3705
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3707
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3708
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3710
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3713
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3716
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3717
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3719
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3722
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3723
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3724
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3726
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3727
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3729
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3730
91. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3731
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3732
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3735
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3738
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3739
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3741
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3742
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3744
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3747
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3750
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3753
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3756
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3759
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3762
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3765
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3768
104. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3770
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3771
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3772
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3774
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3777
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3778
107. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3779
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3781
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3783
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3786
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3789
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3790
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3792
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3793
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3795
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3796
113. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3797
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3798
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3799
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3801
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3804
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3807
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3808
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3810
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3813
119. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3815
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3817
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3819
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3821
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3822
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3825
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3827
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3828
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3831
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3833
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3835
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3837
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3839
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3840
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3843
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3844
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3846
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3849
131. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3851
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3853
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3855
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3856
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3858
134. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3860
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3862
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3864
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3865
136. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3866
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3867
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3868
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3870
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3871
138. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3872
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3873
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3876
140. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3878
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3879
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3882
142. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3884
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3885
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3888
144. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3890
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3892
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3894
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3895
146. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3896
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3897
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3900
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3901
148. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3902
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3903
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3906
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3907
150. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3908
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3909
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3912
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3913
152. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3914
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3915
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3918
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3919
154. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3920
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3921
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3924
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3925
156. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3926
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3927
157. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3929
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3930
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3933
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3934
159. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3935
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3936
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3939
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3940
161. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3941
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3942
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3945
163. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3947
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3948
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3951
165. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3953
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3954
166. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3956
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3957
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3960
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3963
169. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3965
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3966
170. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3968
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3969
171. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3971
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3972
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3973
172. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3974
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3975
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3976
173. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3977
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3978
174. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3980
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3981
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3982
175. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3983
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3984
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3985
176. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3986
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3987
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3988
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3989
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3992
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3993
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3996
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3997
179. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3998
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4000
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 4001
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4004
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 4005
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4008
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 4009
182. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 4010
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 4011
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4012
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 4013
183. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 4014
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 4015
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 4016
184. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 4017
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 4018
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 4019
185. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 4020
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 4021
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 4022
186. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 4023
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 4024
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 4025
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 4026
187. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 4027
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 4028
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 4029
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 4030
188. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 4031
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 4032
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 4033
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4034
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 4035
189. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 4036
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 4037
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 4038
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4039
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 4040
190. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 4041
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 4042
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 4043
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 4044
191. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 4045
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 4046
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 4047
192. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 4048
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 4049
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 4051
193. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 4052
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 4053
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 4054
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 4055
194. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 4056
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 4057
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 4058
195. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 4059
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 4060
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 4061
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 4062
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 4063
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 4064
196. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 4065
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 4066
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 4067
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 4068
197. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 4069
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 4070
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 4071
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 4072
198. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 4073
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 4074
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 4075
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 4076
199. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 4077
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 4078
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 4079
200. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 4080
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 4081
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 4082
201. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4084
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4085
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4086
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4087
202. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 4088
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 4089
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 4090
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 4091
203. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4092
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4093
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4094
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4095
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4097
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4098
205. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 4099
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 4100
206. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 4102
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 4103
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 4104
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4109
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 4113
209. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 4114
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 4115
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 4116
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 4117
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 4120
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4122
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 4123
212. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 4124
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 4125
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 4128
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 4129
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4131
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 4132
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4135
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 4136
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4138
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 4139
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4142
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 4143
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 4145
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 4146
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 4148
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 4153
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 4154
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 4158
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 4159
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 4162
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 4165
224. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4166
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4167
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 4168
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 4169
225. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4170
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4171
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4172
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 4173
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 4176
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 4177
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4180
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 4181
228. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 4182
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 4183
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 4184
229. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 4185
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 4186
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4187
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 4188
230. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4189
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8090194). 4190
231. Henry Garrett, “Strict Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4191
232. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Strict Connective In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4193
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080167). 4194
233. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4195
234. Henry Garrett, “Strict Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4197
235. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4199
236. Henry Garrett, “Equal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4201
237. Henry Garrett, “Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4203
238. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4205
239. Henry Garrett, “Equal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4207
240. Henry Garrett, “Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4209
241. Henry Garrett, “United Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4211
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8027488). 4212
242. Henry Garrett, “Zero Forcing In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4213
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020181). 4214
243. Henry Garrett, “Matrix-Based In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4215
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978921). 4216
244. Henry Garrett, “Collections of Math II”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4217
10.5281/zenodo.7943878). 4218
245. Henry Garrett, “Dominating-Edges In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4219
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943871). 4220
246. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Gap In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4221
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923786). 4222
247. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4223
248. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4225
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904586). 4226
249. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4227
250. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4229
251. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4231
252. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4233
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 4234
253. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4235
254. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4237
255. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4239
256. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4241
257. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4243
258. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4245
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4246
259. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4247
260. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4249
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7810394). 4250
261. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4251
262. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4253
263. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4255
264. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4257
265. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4259
266. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4261
267. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4263
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4264
268. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4265
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4266
269. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4267
270. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4269
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4270
271. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4271
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4272
272. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4273
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4274
273. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4275
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4276
274. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4277
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4278
275. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4279
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4280
276. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4281
277. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4283
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4284
278. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4285
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4286
279. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4287
280. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4289
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4290
281. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4291
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4292
282. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4293
283. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4295
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4296
284. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4297
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4298
285. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4299
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4300
286. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4301
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4302
287. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4303
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4304
288. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4305
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4306
289. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4307
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4308
290. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4309
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4310
291. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4311
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4312
292. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4313
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4314
293. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4315
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4316
294. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4317
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4318
295. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4319
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4320
296. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4321
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4322
297. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4323
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4324
298. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4325
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4326
299. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4327
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4328
300. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4329
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4330
301. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4331
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4332
302. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4333
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4334
303. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4335
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4336
304. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4337
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4338
305. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4339
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4340
306. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4341
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4342
307. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4343
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4344
308. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4345
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4346
309. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4347
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4348
310. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4349
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4350
311. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4351
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4352
312. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4353
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4354
313. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4355
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4356
314. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4357
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4358
315. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4359
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4360
316. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4361
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4362
317. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4363
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4364
318. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4365
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4366
319. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4367
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4368
320. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4369
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4370
321. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4371
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4372
322. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4373
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4374
323. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4375
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4376
324. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4377
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4378
325. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4379
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4380
326. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4381
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4382
327. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4383
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4384
328. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4385
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4386
329. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4387
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4388
330. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4389
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4390
331. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4391
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4392
332. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4393
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4394
333. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4395
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4396
334. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4397
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4398
335. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4399
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4400
336. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4401
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4402
337. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4403
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4404
338. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4405
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4406
339. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4407
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4408
340. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4409
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4410
341. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4411
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4412
342. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4413
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4414
343. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4415
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4416
344. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4417
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4418
345. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4419
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4420
346. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4421
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4422
347. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4423
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4424
348. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4425
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4426
349. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4427
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4428
350. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4429
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4430
351. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4431
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4432
352. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4433
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4434
353. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4435
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4436
354. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4437
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4438
355. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4439
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4440
356. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4441
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4442
357. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4443
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4444
358. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4445
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4446
359. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4447
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4448
View publication stats

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

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

Preprint · June 2023

522 PUBLICATIONS 24,806 CITATIONS

Neutrosophic Graphs View project

On Fuzzy Logic View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating 3

As Hyper Dimple On Super Dimity 4

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 10

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

is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if the following 13

expression is called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating criteria holds 14

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

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

called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating criteria holds 16

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

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

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

called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating criteria holds 19

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

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

called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating criteria holds 21

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

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

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

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic 25

rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperReverse Strict 26

Dimension Dominating). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 27

S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. 28

Then E is called an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating if it’s either of 29

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 30

re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 31

an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of 33

an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 34

SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges 35

of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 38

re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 39

a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 41

cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 42

of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 43

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 44

SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating; an Extreme SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 45

Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 46

Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 47

v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict 48

the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the 50

Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 51

SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 52

consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they 53

corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension 55

Dominating SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperReverse Strict 56

Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, Neutrosophic 57

v-SuperHyperReverse Strict Dimension Dominating, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperReverse Strict 58

is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 60

defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 61

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 62

Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 63