New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperPerfect Search As Hyper Perf On Super Perfidy

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/371982634
New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By

SuperHyperPerfect Search As Hyper Perf On Super Perﬁdy
Preprint · July 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8104836
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
524 PUBLICATIONS 25,200 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project
Featured Articles View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Henry Garrett on 01 July 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 SuperHyperPerfect Search As Hyper 3
Perf On Super Perfidy 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
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10
is a SuperHyperPerfect Search pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11
V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either V 0 or E 0 is called 12
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 13
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 14
E 0 has the maximum chromatic number and has the maximum clique number
and its chromatic number is equal to its clique number;
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 15
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 16
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 17
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 18
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 19
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 20
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 21
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; Neutrosophic 22
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 23
Search, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 24
v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 25
((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). Assume a Neutrosophic 26
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic 27
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called an Extreme 28
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 29
Search, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 30
v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 31
and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 32
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 33
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 34
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme 35
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s 36
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 37
re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and 38
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 39
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 40
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 41
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 42
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 43
Search; an Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 44
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 45
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 47
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 48
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 49
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 50
Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 51
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 52
and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 53
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 54
e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 55
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and Neutrosophic 56
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 57
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 58
coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 59
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 60
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 61
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 62
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 63
Neutrosophic coefficient; an Extreme V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of 64
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 68
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the 69
consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 70
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; a 71
Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 72
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 76
SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic 77
cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 78
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 79
Search; an Extreme V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 80
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 81
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the 84
Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 85
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 86
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 88
and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 89
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 90
N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 94
coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 95
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 96
of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 97
Neutrosophic coefficient. In this scientific research, new setting is introduced for new 100
SuperHyperNotions, namely, a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and Neutrosophic 101
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Two different types of SuperHyperDefinitions are debut 102
for them but the research goes further and the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperUniform, 103
and SuperHyperClass based on that are well-defined and well-reviewed. The literature 104
review is implemented in the whole of this research. For shining the elegancy and the 105
significancy of this research, the comparison between this SuperHyperNotion with other 106
SuperHyperNotions and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are featured. The definitions 107
are followed by the examples and the instances thus the clarifications are driven with 108
different tools. The applications are figured out to make sense about the theoretical 109
aspect of this ongoing research. The “Cancer’s Recognition” are the under research to 110
figure out the challenges make sense about ongoing and upcoming research. The special 111
case is up. The cells are viewed in the deemed ways. There are different types of them. 112
Some of them are individuals and some of them are well-modeled by the group of cells. 113
These types are all officially called “SuperHyperVertex” but the relations amid them all 114
officially called “SuperHyperEdge”. The frameworks “SuperHyperGraph” and 115
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” are chosen and elected to research about “Cancer’s 116
Recognition”. Thus these complex and dense SuperHyperModels open up some avenues 117
to research on theoretical segments and “Cancer’s Recognition”. Some avenues are 118
posed to pursue this research. It’s also officially collected in the form of some questions 119
and some problems. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Assume a SuperHyperGraph. Then 120
δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is a maximal of SuperHyperVertices with a 121
maximum cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the 122
(Neutrosophic) cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : there are 123
|S ∩ N (s)| > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ; and |S ∩ N (s)| < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))| + δ. The first 124
Expression, holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 125
if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is 126
a maximal Neutrosophic of SuperHyperVertices with maximum Neutrosophic 127
cardinality such that either of the following expressions hold for the Neutrosophic 128
cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S there are: 129
|S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic > |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ; 130
and |S ∩ N (s)|N eutrosophic < |S ∩ (V \ N (s))|N eutrosophic + δ. The first Expression, 131
holds if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperOffensive. And the second Expression, holds 132
if S is a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperDefensive It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” 133
version of a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search . Since there’s more ways to get type-results 134
to make a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search more understandable. For the sake of having 135
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of a 136
“SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 137
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 138
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a 139
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search . It’s redefined a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 140
Search if the mentioned Table holds, concerning, “The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, 141
Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyperEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic 142
SuperHyperGraph” with the key points, “The Values of The Vertices & The Number 143
of Position in Alphabet”, “The Values of The SuperVertices&The maximum Values of 144
Its Vertices”, “The Values of The Edges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The 145
Values of The HyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Vertices”, “The Values of The 146
SuperHyperEdges&The maximum Values of Its Endpoints”. To get structural examples 147
and instances, I’m going to introduce the next SuperHyperClass of SuperHyperGraph 148
based on a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search . It’s the main. It’ll be disciplinary to have 149
the foundation of previous definition in the kind of SuperHyperClass. If there’s a need 150
to have all SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search until the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then 151
it’s officially called a “SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” but otherwise, it isn’t a 152
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search . There are some instances about the clarifications for 153
the main definition titled a “SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search ”. These two examples get 154
more scrutiny and discernment since there are characterized in the disciplinary ways of 155
the SuperHyperClass based on a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search . For the sake of having 156
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s a need to “redefine” the notion of 157
a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” and a “Neutrosophic 158
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search ”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges 159
are assigned by the labels from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s 160
the usage of the position of labels to assign to the values. Assume a Neutrosophic 161
SuperHyperGraph. It’s redefined “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” if the intended 162
Table holds. And a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search are redefined to a “Neutrosophic 163
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” if the intended Table holds. It’s useful to define 164
“Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s more ways to get 165
Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search more 166
understandable. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 167
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the intended Table holds. Thus SuperHyperPath, 168
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, 169
SuperHyperMultiPartite, and SuperHyperWheel, are “Neutrosophic 170
SuperHyperPath”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”, “Neutrosophic 171
SuperHyperStar”, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite”, “Neutrosophic 172
SuperHyperMultiPartite”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel” if the intended Table 173
holds. A SuperHyperGraph has a “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” where 174
it’s the strongest [the maximum Neutrosophic value from all the 175
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search amid the maximum value amid all SuperHyperVertices 176
from a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search .] SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search . A graph is a 177
SuperHyperUniform if it’s a SuperHyperGraph and the number of elements of 178
SuperHyperEdges are the same. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are 179
some SuperHyperClasses as follows. It’s SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 180
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; it’s 181
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 182
given SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection 183
amid all SuperHyperEdges; it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as 184
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two 185
separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s 186
only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges and these 187
SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, has no SuperHyperEdge in common; it’s a 188
SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two given 189
SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any common 190
SuperVertex. The SuperHyperModel proposes the specific designs and the specific 191
architectures. The SuperHyperModel is officially called “SuperHyperGraph” and 192
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. In this SuperHyperModel, The “specific” cells and 193
“specific group” of cells are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperVertices” and the 194
common and intended properties between “specific” cells and “specific group” of cells 195
are SuperHyperModeled as “SuperHyperEdges”. Sometimes, it’s useful to have some 196
degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy, and neutrality to have more precise 197
SuperHyperModel which in this case the SuperHyperModel is called “Neutrosophic”. In 198
the future research, the foundation will be based on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and the 199
results and the definitions will be introduced in redeemed ways. The recognition of the 200
cancer in the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model 201
[it’s called SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is 202
identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified 203
since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and 204
the effects of the cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s 205
said to be Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 206
happened and what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and 207
they’ve got the names, and some SuperHyperGeneral SuperHyperModels. The moves 208
and the traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between complicated groups of 209
cells could be fantasized by a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 210
Search, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, 211
SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find either the longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 212
or the strongest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in those Neutrosophic 213
SuperHyperModels. For the longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, called 214
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and the strongest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, called 215
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, some general results are introduced. 216
Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible SuperHyperPaths have only two 217
SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s essential to have at least three 218
SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. There isn’t any 219
formation of any SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search but literarily, it’s the deformation of 220
any SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. A basic 221
familiarity with Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search theory, 222
SuperHyperGraphs, and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs theory are proposed. 223
Keywords: Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 224
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 225
AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45 226
2 Applied Notions Under The Scrutiny Of The 227
Motivation Of This Scientific Research 228
In this scientific research, there are some ideas in the featured frameworks of 229
motivations. I try to bring the motivations in the narrative ways. Some cells have been 230
faced with some attacks from the situation which is caused by the cancer’s attacks. In 231
this case, there are some embedded analysis on the ongoing situations which in that, the 232
cells could be labelled as some groups and some groups or individuals have excessive 233
labels which all are raised from the behaviors to overcome the cancer’s attacks. In the 234
embedded situations, the individuals of cells and the groups of cells could be considered 235
as “new groups”. Thus it motivates us to find the proper SuperHyperModels for getting 236
more proper analysis on this messy story. I’ve found the SuperHyperModels which are 237
officially called “SuperHyperGraphs” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. In this 238
SuperHyperModel, the cells and the groups of cells are defined as “SuperHyperVertices” 239
and the relations between the individuals of cells and the groups of cells are defined as 240
“SuperHyperEdges”. Thus it’s another motivation for us to do research on this 241
SuperHyperModel based on the “Cancer’s Recognition”. Sometimes, the situations get 242
worst. The situation is passed from the certainty and precise style. Thus it’s the beyond 243
them. There are three descriptions, namely, the degrees of determinacy, indeterminacy 244
and neutrality, for any object based on vague forms, namely, incomplete data, imprecise 245
data, and uncertain analysis. The latter model could be considered on the previous 246
SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperModel. It’s SuperHyperGraph but it’s officially 247
called “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is 248
going to figure out what’s going on this phenomenon. The special case of this disease is 249
considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 250
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 251
matter of mind. The recognition of the cancer could help to find some treatments for 252
this disease. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are the 253
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognition” and both bases are the background 254
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 255
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 256
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 257
forms of alliances’ styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 258
formally called “ SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” in the themes of jargons and 259
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 260
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. The recognition of the cancer in 261
the long-term function. The specific region has been assigned by the model [it’s called 262
SuperHyperGraph] and the long cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this 263
research. Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are 264
some determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 265
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 266
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s happened and 267
what’s done. There are some specific models, which are well-known and they’ve got the 268
names, and some general models. The moves and the traces of the cancer on the 269
complex tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 270
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, SuperHyperStar, 271
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 272
either the optimal SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search or the Neutrosophic 273
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in those Neutrosophic SuperHyperModels. Some general 274
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Neutrosophic 275
SuperHyperPath s have only two SuperHyperEdges but it’s not enough since it’s 276
essential to have at least three SuperHyperEdges to form any style of a 277
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. There isn’t any formation of any 278
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search but literarily, it’s the deformation of any 279
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. It, literarily, deforms and it doesn’t form. 280
Question 2.1. How to define the SuperHyperNotions and to do research on them to 281
find the “ amount of SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” of either individual of cells or the 282
groups of cells based on the fixed cell or the fixed group of cells, extensively, the “amount 283
of SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” based on the fixed groups of cells or the fixed groups of 284
group of cells? 285
Question 2.2. What are the best descriptions for the “Cancer’s Recognition” in terms 286
of these messy and dense SuperHyperModels where embedded notions are illustrated? 287
It’s motivation to find notions to use in this dense model is titled 288
“SuperHyperGraphs”. Thus it motivates us to define different types of “ 289
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” on 290
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has 291
taken more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid 292
this SuperHyperNotion with other SuperHyperNotions. It motivates us to get some 293
instances and examples to make clarifications about the framework of this research. The 294
general results and some results about some connections are some avenues to make key 295
point of this research, “Cancer’s Recognition”, more understandable and more clear. 296
The framework of this research is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic 297
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In the subsection “Preliminaries”, initial 298
definitions about SuperHyperGraphs and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph are 299
deeply-introduced and in-depth-discussed. The elementary concepts are clarified and 300
illustrated completely and sometimes review literature are applied to make sense about 301
what’s going to figure out about the upcoming sections. The main definitions and their 302
clarifications alongside some results about new notions, SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 303
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, are figured out in sections “ 304
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”. In 305
the sense of tackling on getting results and in SuperHyperPerfect Search to make sense about 306
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Neutrosophic 307
SuperHyperUniform are introduced and as their consequences, corresponded 308
SuperHyperClasses are figured out to debut what’s done in this section, titled “Results 309
on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. As going 310
back to origin of the notions, there are some smart steps toward the common notions to 311
extend the new notions in new frameworks, SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 312
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 313
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. The starter research about the general 314
SuperHyperRelations and as concluding and closing section of theoretical research are 315
contained in the section “General Results”. Some general SuperHyperRelations are 316
fundamental and they are well-known as fundamental SuperHyperNotions as elicited 317
and discussed in the sections, “General Results”, “ SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”, 318
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and 319
“Results on Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s 320
done about the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and 321
going to figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as 322
presented in section, “ SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”. The keyword of this research 323
debut in the section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and 324
subsections “Case 1: The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as 325
SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite 326
as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, “Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and 327
discernment on what’s done and what’s happened in this research in the terms of 328
“questions” and “problems” to make sense to figure out this research in featured style. 329
The advantages and the limitations of this research alongside about what’s done in this 330
research to make sense and to get sense about what’s figured out are included in the 331
section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 332
3 Neutrosophic Preliminaries Of This Scientific 333
Research On the Redeemed Ways 334
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 335
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 336
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.5,p.2), 337
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 338
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 339
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 340
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [1],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 341
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 342
(Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 343
to Ref. [231]. 344
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 345
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 346
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.1,p.1). 347
Let X be a SuperHyperPerfect Search 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 348
+
]− 0, 1 [. 349
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2). 350
Let X be a SuperHyperPerfect Search 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 351
2.5,p.2). 352
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 353
pair S = (V, E), where 354
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 355
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 356
1, 2, . . . , n); 357
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 358
V; 359
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 360
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 361
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 362
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 363
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 364
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 365
(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 . 366
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 367
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 368
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 369
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 370
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 371
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 372
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 373
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 374
the ii0 th element of the SuperHyperPerfect Search of Neutrosophic 375
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 376
and E are crisp sets. 377
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 378
(Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3). 379
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 380
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 381
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 382
characterized as follow-up items. 383
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 384
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 385
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 386
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 387
HyperEdge; 388
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 389
SuperEdge; 390
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 391
SuperHyperEdge. 392
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 393
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 394
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3). 395
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 396
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 397
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 398
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 399
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 400
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 401
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)). 402
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 403
pair S = (V, E), where 404
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 405
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 406
1, 2, . . . , n); 407
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 408
V; 409
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 410
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 411
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 412
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 413
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 414
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 415
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 416
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 417
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 418
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 419
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 420
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 421
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 422
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 423
the ii0 th element of the SuperHyperPerfect Search of Neutrosophic 424
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 425
and E are crisp sets. 426
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 427
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 429
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 430
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 431
characterized as follow-up items. 432
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 433
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 434
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 435
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 436
HyperEdge; 437
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 438
SuperEdge; 439
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 440
SuperHyperEdge. 441
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 442
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 443
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 444
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 445
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 446
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 447
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 448
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 449
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 450
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 451
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 452
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 453
given SuperHyperEdges; 454
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 455
SuperHyperEdges; 456
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 457
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 458
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 459
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 460
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 461
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 462
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 463
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 464
common SuperVertex. 465
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 466
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 467
of following conditions hold: 468
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 476
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 477
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 478
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 479
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. 480
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 481
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 482
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 483
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 484
SuperHyperPath . 485
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 486
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 488
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 489
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 490
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 491
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 492
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 493
(NSHE)). (Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). 494
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 495
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 496
(ix) Neutrosophic t-Connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 497
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 498
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 499
(x) Neutrosophic i-Connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 500
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 501
(xi) Neutrosophic f-Connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 503
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 504
(xii) Neutrosophic Connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 506
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 507
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 508
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 509
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 510
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). 511
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 513
either V 0 or E 0 is called 514
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is 515
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 516
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression 517
is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 518
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 519
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is 520
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 521
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression 522
is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 523
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 524
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 525
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 528
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). 529
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 532
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 535
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 536
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 537
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 538
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 539
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 540
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 541
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 544
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 545
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 546
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 547
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 549
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if 550
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 551
re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 552
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an 553
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 554
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 555
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 556
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 557
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; and the Extreme power is corresponded 559
to its Extreme coefficient; 560
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial 561
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 562
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a 564
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 565
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 566
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 567
Neutrosophic coefficient; 572
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 573
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 576
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 579
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 581
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of 582
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 586
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 587
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 588
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 589
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 590
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if 591
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 592
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an 594
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 597
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 598
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; and the Extreme power is corresponded 600
to its Extreme coefficient; 601
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial 602
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 603
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 609
Neutrosophic coefficient. 613
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). 614
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 615
Table 1. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHy-

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
The Values of The Vertices The Number of Position in Alphabet
The Values of The SuperVertices The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The Edges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The HyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Vertices
The Values of The SuperHyperEdges The maximum Values of Its Endpoints
(i) an δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is a Neutrosophic kind of Neutrosophic 616
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search such that either of the following expressions hold 617
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 618
|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 619
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 620
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is a Neutrosophic kind of 621
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search such that either of the following 622
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 623
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 624
|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. 625
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 626
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 627
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s a need 628
to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 629
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 630
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 631
assign to the values. 632
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 633
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 634
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 635
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 636
understandable. 637
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 638
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 639
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 640
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 641
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 642
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 643
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 644
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 645
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 646
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 647
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search more Neutrosophicly understandable. 648

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

perEdges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph Mentioned in the Definition
(3.23)
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s a need 649
to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 650
Search”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels 651
from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of 652
labels to assign to the values. 653
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. It’s redefined a 654
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the Table (3) holds. 655
4 Neutrosophic SuperHyper But As SuperHyperPerfect Search 656
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 657
Forms 658
Definition 4.1. (Neutrosophic event). 659
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Any Neutrosophic k-subset of A of V is 661
called Neutrosophic k-event and if k = 2, then Neutrosophic subset of A of V is 662
called Neutrosophic event. The following expression is called Neutrosophic 663
probability of A. 664
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Neutrosophic Independent). 665
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. s Neutrosophic k-events Ai , i ∈ I is 667
called Neutrosophic s-independent if the following expression is called 668
Neutrosophic s-independent criteria 669
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Neutrosophic k-events of A and B is called Neutrosophic 670
independent. The following expression is called Neutrosophic independent 671
criteria 672
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Neutrosophic Variable). 673
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Any k-function SuperHyperPerfect Search like E 675
is called Neutrosophic k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function SuperHyperPerfect Search 676
like E is called Neutrosophic Variable. 677
The notion of independent on Neutrosophic Variable is likewise. 678
Definition 4.4. (Neutrosophic Expectation). 679
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 681
number is called Neutrosophic Expectation if the following expression is called 682
Neutrosophic Expectation criteria 683
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Neutrosophic Crossing). 684
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A Neutrosophic number is called 686
Neutrosophic Crossing if the following expression is called Neutrosophic 687
Crossing criteria 688
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 689
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let m and n propose 690
special SuperHyperPerfect Search. Then with m ≥ 4n, 691
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be a 692
Neutrosophic random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G 693
Neutrosophic independently with probability SuperHyperPerfect Search p := 4n/m, and set 694
H := G[S] and H := G[S]. 695
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: 696
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ 3
= 3 = m n .
p (4n/m) 64
697
Theorem 4.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 698
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let P be a 699
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let l be the Neutrosophic number of 700
SuperHyperLines
√ in the plane passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 701
1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 702
Proof. Form a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex 703
SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points 704
on the SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This 705
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 706
crossing at most l choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , 707
3
or l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and 708
again l < 32n2 /k 3 . 709
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let P be a 711
SuperHyperSet of n points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P 712
at unit SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 713
Proof. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 714
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 715
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Neutrosophic 716
number of these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then 717
i = 0n−1 ni = n and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form a Neutrosophic

P P
718
SuperHyperGraph H with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose 719
SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on 720
the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 721
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 722
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 723
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G with 724
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 725
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 726
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 727
by the Neutrosophic Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 728
Proposition 4.9. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 729
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let X be a 730
nonnegative Neutrosophic Variable and t a positive real number. Then 731
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. 732
Corollary 4.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 733
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let Xn be a 734
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 735
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 736
Proof. 737
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A special 739
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 740
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A special SuperHyperGraph in 742
Gn,p is up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 743
SuperHyperVertices of G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable 744
SuperHyperSet of G is (1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the 745
(k + 1)choose2 pairs of SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the 746
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph G. 747
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 748
the indicator Neutrosophic Variable for this Neutrosophic Event. By equation, we have 749
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 750
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 751
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: 752
nk+1
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 753
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 754
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 755
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 756
n → ∞. Consequently, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has 757
stability number at most k. 758
Definition 4.12. (Neutrosophic Variance). 759
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A Neutrosophic k-Variable E has a 761
number is called Neutrosophic Variance if the following expression is called 762
Neutrosophic Variance criteria 763
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let X be a 765
Neutrosophic Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 766
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let X be a Neutrosophic 768
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 769
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ = .
t2 t2
770
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let Xn be a 772
Neutrosophic Variable in a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 773
and V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 774
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Set X := Xn and 776
t := |Ex(Xn )| in Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that 777
E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| 778
when Xn = 0. 779
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 781
0 ≤ k ≤ n, set f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for 782
which f (k) is less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values 783
k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 784
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. As in the proof of related 786
Theorem, the result is straightforward. 787
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let 789
f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 790
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 791
or 792
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 793
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. The latter is 795
straightforward. 796
Definition 4.17. (Neutrosophic Threshold). 797
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let P be a monotone property of 799
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 800
Neutrosophic Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 801
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 802
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 803
Definition 4.18. (Neutrosophic Balanced). 804
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let F be a fixed Neutrosophic 806
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 807
copy of F as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph is called Neutrosophic Balanced. 808
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let F be a nonempty 810
balanced Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 811
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 812
as a Neutrosophic SubSuperHyperGraph. 813
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. The latter is 815
Example 4.20. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 817
S = (V, E) in the mentioned Neutrosophic Figures in every Neutrosophic items. 818
• On the Figure (1), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 819
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is 820
Neutrosophicly straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic 821
SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a 822
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 823
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, 824
E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that 825
there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus 826
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 827
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 828
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search =

{E4 , E2 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperPerfect Search =
{V1 }.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
829
Vi (TVi , IVi , FVi ) Ei (TEi , IEi , FEi )
V1 (0.13, 0.13, 0.13) E1 (0, 0, 0)
V2 (0.13, 0.13, 0.13) E2 (0.13, 0.13, 0.13)
V3 (0.15, 0.15, 0.15) E3 (0, 0, 0)
V4 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14) E4 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14)
On the Figure (2), the Neutrosophic SuperHyperNotion, namely, Neutrosophic 830
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 831
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but E4 832
is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 833
Figure 1. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

of Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Neutrosophic Example (16.3)
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The 834
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 835
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the 836
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Neutrosophic 837

{E4 }.
= z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
{V4 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
839
V1 (0.13, 0.13, 0.13) E1 (0, 0, 0)
V2 (0.03, 0.03, 0.03) E2 (0, 0, 0)
V3 (0.15, 0.15, 0.15) E3 (0, 0, 0)
V4 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14) E4 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14)


{E4 }.
= z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
{V3 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
843
V1 (0.13, 0.13, 0.13) E1 (0, 0, 0)
V2 (0.11, 0.11, 0.11) E2 (0, 0, 0)
V3 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14) E3 (0, 0, 0)
- - E4 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14)


{E1 , E4 }.
= z (0.08,0.08,0.08) + z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
{V3 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
847
V1 (0.13, 0.13, 0.13) E1 (0.08, 0.08, 0.08)
V2 (0.11, 0.11, 0.11) E2 (0.15, 0.15, 0.15)
V3 (0.05, 0.05, 0.05) E3 (0, 0, 0)
V4 (0.12, 0.12, 0.12) E4 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14)
{F } (0.06, 0.06, 0.06) E5 (0.14, 0.14, 0.14)
{H} (0.08, 0.08, 0.08) - -
{N } (0.14, 0.14, 0.14) - -
{O} (0.15, 0.15, 0.15) - -


{E1 , E4 }.
= 2z (0.2,0.2,0.2) .
{Vii=15 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.14,0.14,0.14) + z (0.16,0.16,0.16) + z (0.18,0.18,0.18) + z (0.2,0.2,0.2) .
851

{E8 , E9 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V8 , V9 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
855




{E1 , E2 , E3 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V12 , V13 , V14 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
859

{E3 , E4 }.
= 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{Vi=811 , V14 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.14,0.14,0.14) + z (0.17,0.17,0.17)
+z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
863


{E8 , E9 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V8 , V9 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
867

{E1 , E2 , E3 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V12 , V13 , V14 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
871

Figure 10. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Neutrosophic

Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Neutrosophic Example
(16.3)

(16.3)

{E2 , E4 , E5 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V4 , V5 , V6 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
875

{E1 , E4 }.
= 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V1 , V2 , V3 , V7 , V8 }.
= z 5−a .

(16.3)
879

{E2 , E4 , E5 }.
= z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V4 , V5 , V6 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.2,0.2,0.2) + z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
883

(16.3)

{E1 , E2 }.
= z (0.08,0.08,0.08) + z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
{V1 , V2 }.
= z (0.08,0.08,0.08) + z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
887

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
891

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
895

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
899

(16.3)

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
903

(16.3)

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
907

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.

(16.3)

(16.3)

(16.3)
911

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
915

(16.3)

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
919
Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 920
ESHG : (V, E). The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any 921
Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 922
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 923
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 924
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 925
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 926
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 927
only the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 928
inside of any given Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search minus all Neutrosophic 929
SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an 930
unique Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct 931
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, minus all 932
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 933
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-SuperHyperPerfect Search is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect 934
Search is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 935
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 936
SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the Neutrosophic 937
SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 938
SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search in some cases but the 939
maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Neutrosophic 940
number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 941
are contained in a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. 942
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E).

Then the Neutrosophic number of type-result-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the least Neutrosophic 943
cardinality, the lower sharp Neutrosophic bound for cardinality. 944
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 945
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 946
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is a Neutrosophic type-result-SuperHyperPerfect Search. In other words, the least cardinality, the 947
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic type-result-SuperHyperPerfect Search is 948
the cardinality of 949

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP 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-SuperHyperPerfect
Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower sharp
bound for the cardinality, of a quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect
Search. 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 950
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 951
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 952
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 953
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the 954
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to 955
be applied. Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main 956
definition but by the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 957
The Neutrosophic structure of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search. 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search has the Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperEdge. Thus, a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search has the Neutrosophic
cardinality at least a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Assume a Neutrosophic
SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet isn’t a Neutrosophic
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search” 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as used 958
Neutrosophic background in the Neutrosophic terms of worst Neutrosophic case and the 959
common theme of the lower Neutrosophic bound occurred in the specific Neutrosophic 960
SuperHyperClasses of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are Neutrosophic 961
free-quasi-triangle. 962
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-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Those Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in a Neutrosophic style-R-SuperHyperPerfect
Search. 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search
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-SuperHyperPerfect Search.

E
Let Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong
to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . Thus,
E
E = {Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}.
Or
{aE , bE , cE , . . .}E={E∈EESHG:(V,E) | |E|=max{|E| | E∈EESHG:(V,E) }} .
But with the slightly differences, 963
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search =

E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
964
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search =

Thus E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is a Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search where

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Neutrosophic
intended SuperHyperVertices but in a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search,
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-SuperHyperPerfect Search is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic 965
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is at least the maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic 966
SuperHyperVertices of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number 967
of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. In other words, the maximum number of the 968
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum Neutrosophic number of 969
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search in 970
some cases but the maximum number of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge with the 971
maximum Neutrosophic number of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, has the 972
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are contained in a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. 973
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges. But the 974
non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel 975
addresses some issues about the Neutrosophic optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially 976
delivers some remarks on the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 977
SuperHyperVertices such that there’s distinct amount of Neutrosophic 978
SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices up to all 979
taken from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 980
but this Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is either 981
has the maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality or it doesn’t have maximum 982
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious SuperHyperModel, there’s at 983
least one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge containing at least all Neutrosophic 984
SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms a Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search where the 985
Neutrosophic completion of the Neutrosophic incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, literarily, 986
a Neutrosophic embedded R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The SuperHyperNotions of embedded 987
SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, these types of 988
SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the 989
embedded setting is elected such that those SuperHyperSets have the maximum 990
Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality and they’re Neutrosophic SuperHyperOptimal. 991
The less than two distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are included in the 992
minimum Neutrosophic style of the embedded Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The 993
interior types of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are deciders. Since the 994
Neutrosophic number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by the interior 995
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and more 996
formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet for any 997
distinct types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices pose the Neutrosophic 998
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Thus Neutrosophic exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used 999
only in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and in Neutrosophic SuperHyperRelation 1000
with the interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in that Neutrosophic 1001
SuperHyperEdge. In the embedded Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s the usage 1002
of exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices since they’ve more connections inside more 1003
than outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more relevant than the title “interior”. One 1004
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex has no connection, inside. Thus, the Neutrosophic 1005
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices with one SuperHyperElement 1006
has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case implying the Neutrosophic 1007
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the exclusion of the 1008
exclusion of all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1009
and with other terms, the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the inclusion of all 1010
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices in one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, is a 1011
Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 1012
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Neutrosophic 1013
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct 1014
interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Neutrosophic 1015
quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them 1016
but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Neutrosophic 1017
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Neutrosophic 1018
SuperHyperVertices in an Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, minus all 1019
Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1020
The main definition of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search has two titles. a 1021
Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search and its corresponded quasi-maximum 1022
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For 1023
any Neutrosophic number, there’s a Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with that 1024
quasi-maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded 1025
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Neutrosophic 1026
SuperHyperGraph, then the Neutrosophic quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the 1027
collection of all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Searchs for all Neutrosophic 1028
numbers less than its Neutrosophic corresponded maximum number. The essence of the 1029
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ends up but this essence starts up in the terms of the 1030
Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, again and more in the operations of collecting 1031
all the Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Searchs acted on the all possible used 1032
formations of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph to achieve one Neutrosophic number. 1033
This Neutrosophic number is 1034
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Searchs. 1035
Let zNeutrosophic Number , SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet and GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search 1036
be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet and a Neutrosophic 1037
SuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1038
[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class = {SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |

SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet = GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ,
|SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search is 1039
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1040
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number
{SNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |
= zNeutrosophic Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1041
technical definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search. 1042
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search =

{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 1043
SuperHyperPerfect Search poses the upcoming expressions. 1044

{S ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1045

= max zNeutrosophic Number

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1046


To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1047
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1048

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

1049


1050


Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, 1051
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the 1052
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Neutrosophic 1053
SuperHyperVertices are incident to a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, 1054
another name for “Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search” but, precisely, it’s the 1055
generalization of “Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search” since “Neutrosophic 1056
Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search” happens “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search” in a Neutrosophic 1057
SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and background but “Neutrosophic 1058
SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search” in a 1059
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and preliminarily background 1060
since there are some ambiguities about the Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality arise 1061
from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood”, 1062
“Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search”, and “Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search” are up. 1063
Thus, let 1064
zNeutrosophic Number , NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1065
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search be a Neutrosophic number, a Neutrosophic 1066
SuperHyperNeighborhood and a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search and the new terms are 1067
up. 1068
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number

[zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
∪zNeutrosophic Number {NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1069

{NNeutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =
|NNeutrosophic SuperHyperSet |Neutrosophic Cardinality
1070

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class |
1071

And with go back to initial structure, 1072
GNeutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =


1073

∈ ∪zNeutrosophic Number [zNeutrosophic Number ]Neutrosophic Class =

1074


1075


Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1076
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect 1077
Search if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1078
some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are mutually Neutrosophic 1079
SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all minus all Neutrosophic 1080
SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1081
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1082
are coming up. 1083
The following Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices is

the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search.
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect

Search. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1084
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1085
the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 1086
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic 1087
SuperHyperEdge amid some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1088
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search 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 SuperHyperPerfect Search is
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperPerfect Search 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-SuperHyperPerfect Search is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperVertices,
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1089
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1090
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1091
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Neutrosophic 1092
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search and it’s an 1093
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it’s 1094
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 SuperHyperPerfect Search.
There isn’t only less than two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search,
is up. The non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic

SuperHyperPerfect Search, not:
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Neutrosophic 1095
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1096
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1097
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1098
“Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search” 1099
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1100
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, 1101
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-SuperHyperPerfect Search amid
those obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets of the Neutrosophic
SuperHyperPerfect Search, are
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1102
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower
sharp bound for the cardinality, of a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is the
cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1103
The all interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices belong to any Neutrosophic 1104
quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search if for any of them, and any of other corresponded 1105
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, some interior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices are 1106
mutually Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors with no Neutrosophic exception at all 1107
minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of them. 1108
Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let a 1109
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Neutrosophic 1110
SuperHyperVertices r. Consider all Neutrosophic numbers of those Neutrosophic 1111
SuperHyperVertices from that Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more 1112
than r distinct Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Neutrosophic 1113
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s a 1114
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the least cardinality, the lower sharp 1115
Neutrosophic bound for Neutrosophic cardinality. Assume a connected Neutrosophic 1116
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1117
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1118
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1119
to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t a Neutrosophic 1120
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it doesn’t have 1121
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1123
to have some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the 1124
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Neutrosophic 1125
cardinality of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices but 1126
it isn’t a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it doesn’t do the Neutrosophic 1127
procedure such that such that there’s a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some 1128
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely [there are at least one Neutrosophic 1129
SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, sometimes in the connected Neutrosophic 1130
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), a Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, titled its 1131
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex in the 1132
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Neutrosophic procedure”.]. 1133
There’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex outside the intended Neutrosophic 1134
SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhood. 1135
Thus the obvious Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, VESHE is up. The obvious simple 1136
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, VESHE , is 1137
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Neutrosophic 1138
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Neutrosophic pairs are titled 1139
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1140
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1141
SuperHyperVertices VESHE , is the 1142
maximum Neutrosophic SuperHyperCardinality of a Neutrosophic 1143
SuperHyperSet S of Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s a 1144
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge to have some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices uniquely. 1145
Thus, in a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any 1146
Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect Search only contains all interior Neutrosophic 1147
SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices from the unique 1148
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of them has all possible Neutrosophic 1149
SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods in 1150
with no exception minus all Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all 1151
of them but everything is possible about Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighborhoods and 1152
Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1153
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyperPerfect Search, is up. There’s neither empty 1154
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Neutrosophic 1155
SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple 1156
Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search. The 1157
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1158

|EESHG:(V,E) |Neutrosophic Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)N eutrosophicR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search . 1159
The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1160
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1161

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1162
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is a Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet with 1163
of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no 1165
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge is common and 1166
there’s an Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge for all Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices. 1167
There are not only two Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1168
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search is 1169
up. The obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic 1170
SuperHyperPerfect Search is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet includes only two Neutrosophic 1171
SuperHyperVertices. But the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1172

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 1174
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet of the 1175
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search is up. To sum them up, the Neutrosophic 1176
SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1177

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 1178
SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet of the Neutrosophic 1179

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Neutrosophic 1181
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of 1182
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1183
for some Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices given by that Neutrosophic 1184
type-SuperHyperSet called the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search and it’s an 1185
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it’s 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 aren’t only less than three Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices inside the intended 1191
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1192

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search , 1193

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 1194
SuperHyperPerfect Search , not: 1195

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, not: 1196

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 1197
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1198
simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSet called the 1199
“Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search ” 1200
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Neutrosophic type-SuperHyperSets called the 1201
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect Search , 1202
is only and only 1203

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1204
5 The Neutrosophic Departures on The Theoretical 1205
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1206
The previous Neutrosophic approach apply on the upcoming Neutrosophic results on 1207
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses. 1208
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1209
Then 1210

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1211
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1212
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1213
ESHP : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1214
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 1215
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. The 1216
latter is straightforward. 1217
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath 1218
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, in the 1219
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1220
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1221
Figure 23. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Neutrosophic

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Example (16.5)
Then 1222

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1223
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1224
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions

be a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1225
ESHC : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1226

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1230
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic 1231
SuperHyperSet, in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (24), is the Neutrosophic 1232
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1234
Then 1235

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Figure 25. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar Associated to the Neutrosophic Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Neutrosophic Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1236
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1237
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1238
There’s a new way to redefine as 1239

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar 1243
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, 1244
by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic 1245
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in 1246
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1247
Search. 1248
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1249
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1250

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1251
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
1252
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 1253
ESHB : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1254

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1257
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1258
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1259
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1260
the 1261
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search taken from a connected Neutrosophic 1262
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1263
Figure 26. Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Neutrosophic Associated to the Neutro-

sophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Neutrosophic-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any 1264
solution 1265
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1266
Example 5.8. In the Neutrosophic Figure (26), the connected Neutrosophic 1267
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1268
featured. The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1269
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1270
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1271
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1272
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1273
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1274

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1275
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
1276
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 1278

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1281
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1282
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1283
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1284
the 1285
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite 1286
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1287
solution 1289
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1291
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Neutrosophic 1292
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Neutrosophic featured. 1293
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Neutrosophic 1294
result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic 1295
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (27), 1296
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1297
Figure 27. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1298
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1299

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1300
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1301
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1303

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

trosophic Notions of Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Neutrosophic
Example (16.15)
latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Thus 1306
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1307
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search could be applied. The unique embedded 1308
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search proposes some longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 1309
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1310
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Neutrosophic highlighted and featured. The 1312
obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the 1313
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 1314
ESHW : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (28), is the Neutrosophic 1315
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1317
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1318
For the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and 1319
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, some general results are introduced. 1320
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is 1321
“redefined” on the positions of the alphabets. 1322
Corollary 6.2. Assume Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1323
N eutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearch =

{theSuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearchof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearch
|N eutrosophiccardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearch. }
plus one Neutrosophic SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on 1324
the SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1325
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1326
Corollary 6.3. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter 1327
of the alphabet. Then the notion of Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and 1328
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search coincide. 1329
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a 1331
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if and only if it’s a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1332
of the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1334
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1335
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph on the 1336
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 1337
is its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and reversely. 1338
Corollary 6.7. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 1339
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1340
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1341
Search is its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and reversely. 1342
Corollary 6.8. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1343
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1344
Search isn’t well-defined. 1345
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1346
its Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1347
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined. 1348
Corollary 6.10. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1349
, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel).

Search 1350
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1351
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined. 1352
Corollary 6.11. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then its Neutrosophic 1353
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 1354
is well-defined. 1355
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1356
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined if and only if its 1357
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined. 1358
Corollary 6.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1359
, SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel).

Search 1360
Then its Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined if and only if its 1361
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined. 1362
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then V 1363
is 1364
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1365
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1366
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1367
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1368
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1369
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1370
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then 1371
∅ is 1372
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1373
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1374
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1375
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1376
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1377
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1378
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1379
independent SuperHyperSet is 1380
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1381
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1382
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1383
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1384
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1385
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1386
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperUniform 1387
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1388
maximal 1389
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1390
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1391
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1392
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1393
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1394
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1395
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1396
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1397
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1398
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1399
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1400
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1401
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1402
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1403
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1404
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1405
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1407
number of 1408
(i) : the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1409
(ii) : the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1410
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1411
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1412
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1413
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1414
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1415
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1416
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1418
(i) : the dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1419
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1420
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1421
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1422
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1423
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1424
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1425
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1428
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1429
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1430
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1431
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1435
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1436
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1437
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1440
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1441
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1442
is a 1443
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1447
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1448
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1449
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1452
number of 1453
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1457
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1458
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1459
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1460
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1461
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1462
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. The 1464
number of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1465
(iv) : SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1469
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1470
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1471
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1472
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Neutrosophic number is at most On (ESHG). 1473
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1474
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1475
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1476
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1480
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1482
∅. The number is 0 and the Neutrosophic number is 0, for an independent 1484
SuperHyperSet in the setting of dual 1485
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1489
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1490
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1491
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1493
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1495
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Neutrosophic number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting 1496
of a dual 1497
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1501
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1502
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1503
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1505
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Neutrosophic number is 1506
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1507
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1513
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1514
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the 1515
result is obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the 1516
SuperHyperFamily N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the 1517
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs. 1518
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1519
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S 1520
such that 1521
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1522
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1523
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. If 1524
S is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then 1525
(i) S is SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search set; 1526
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1527
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. 1528
Then 1529
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1530
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1531
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1532
which is connected. Then 1533
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1534
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1535
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1536
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1537
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1539
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1540
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1541
a dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1542
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1543
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1544
Search; 1545
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1546
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1547
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1548
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1549
dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1550
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1551
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1552
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1554
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1555
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1556
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1557
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1559
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1560
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1562
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1563
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1564
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1566
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1567
(ii) Γ = 1; 1568
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1569
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1570
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1571
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1572
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1573
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1574
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1575
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1576
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1577
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1578
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1579
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1581
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} b n c+1

2
; 1582
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1583
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1585
bnc
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1586
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1588
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

bnc ; 1589
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1590
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Neutrosophic 1592
SuperHyperStars with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1593
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1594
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF; 1595
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1596
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1597
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1598
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF : (V, E). 1599
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1600
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1601
SuperHyperSet. Then 1602
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1603
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF; 1604
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1605

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1606
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1607
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF : (V, E). 1608
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1609
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 1610
SuperHyperSet. Then 1611
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1612
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF : (V, E); 1613
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1614

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1615
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1616
Search for N SHF : (V, E). 1617
Then following statements hold; 1619
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1620
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is an 1621
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1622
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1623
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is a dual 1624
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1625
Then following statements hold; 1627
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1628
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is an 1629
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1630
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1631
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is a dual 1632
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1633
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1634
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1635
statements hold; 1636
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1637
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1638
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c

+ 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1639
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1641
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1643
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1644
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1645
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. Then following 1646
statements hold; 1647
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c

+ 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1648
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1650
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1652
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1654
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1655
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1657
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1658
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1659
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1661
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1663
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1666
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is a 1668
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1669
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1670
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1672
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1674
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1675
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1677
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1679
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then following statements hold; 1680
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1681
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1683
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1685
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1688
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph which is 1690
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then following statements hold; 1691
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1692
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1694
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1696
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1699
7 Neutrosophic Applications in Cancer’s 1700
Neutrosophic Recognition 1701
The cancer is the Neutrosophic disease but the Neutrosophic model is going to figure 1702
out what’s going on this Neutrosophic phenomenon. The special Neutrosophic case of 1703
this Neutrosophic disease is considered and as the consequences of the model, some 1704
parameters are used. The cells are under attack of this disease but the moves of the 1705
cancer in the special region are the matter of mind. The Neutrosophic recognition of the 1706
cancer could help to find some Neutrosophic treatments for this Neutrosophic disease. 1707
In the following, some Neutrosophic steps are Neutrosophic devised on this disease. 1708
Step 1. (Neutrosophic Definition) The Neutrosophic recognition of the cancer in 1709
the long-term Neutrosophic function. 1710
Step 2. (Neutrosophic Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the 1711
Neutrosophic model [it’s called Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] and the long 1712
Neutrosophic cycle of the move from the cancer is identified by this research. 1713
Sometimes the move of the cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some 1714
determinacy, indeterminacy and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the 1715
cancer on that region; this event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be 1716
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph] to have convenient perception on what’s 1717
happened and what’s done. 1718
Step 3. (Neutrosophic Model) There are some specific Neutrosophic models, 1719
which are well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Neutrosophic 1720
models. The moves and the Neutrosophic traces of the cancer on the complex 1721
tracks and between complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by a 1722
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, SuperHyperStar, 1723
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1724
find either the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search or the Neutrosophic 1725
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in those Neutrosophic Neutrosophic 1726
SuperHyperModels. 1727
8 Case 1: The Initial Neutrosophic Steps 1728
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite as 1729
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1730
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (29), the 1731
Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and Neutrosophic 1732
featured. 1733
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Neutrosophic 1734
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1735
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1736
previous Neutrosophic result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the 1737
connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1738
Figure 29. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Neutro-

sophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite
9 Case 2: The Increasing Neutrosophic Steps 1740
Toward Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite as 1741
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel 1742
Step 4. (Neutrosophic Solution) In the Neutrosophic Figure (30), the 1743
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite is Neutrosophic highlighted and 1744
Neutrosophic featured. 1745
By using the Neutrosophic Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Neutrosophic 1746
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1747
The obtained Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet, by the Neutrosophic Algorithm in 1748
previous result, of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of the connected 1749
Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Neutrosophic 1750
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1752
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1753
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1754
The SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1755
Search are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1756
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1757
recognitions? 1758
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1759
and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search?

Search 1760
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1761
compute them? 1762
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1763
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search? 1764
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Neutrosophic 1765
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1766
they’re based on SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, are there else? 1767
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1768
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1769
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1770
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1771
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1772
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1773
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1774
highlighted. 1775
This research uses some approaches to make Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs more 1776
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1777
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. For that sake in the second definition, the main 1778
definition of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the 1779
alphabets. Based on the new definition for the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph, the 1780
new SuperHyperNotion, Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, finds the 1781
convenient background to implement some results based on that. Some 1782
SuperHyperClasses and some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this 1783
research on the modeling of the regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to 1784
recognize this disease as it’s mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To 1785
formalize the instances on the SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, the 1786
new SuperHyperClasses and SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results 1787
are gathered in the section on the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Neutrosophic 1788
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. The clarifications, instances and literature reviews have 1789
taken the whole way through. In this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the 1790
lines containing the notions and the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 1791
SuperHyperGraph are the SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both 1792
bases are the background of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on 1793
the region, full of cells, groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the 1794
SuperHyperModel proposes some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the 1795
moves of the cancer in the longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design 1796
and the architecture are formally called “ SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” in the themes 1797
of jargons and buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the 1798
embedded styles to figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table 1799
(6), benefits and avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1800
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search
3. Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
12 Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality But As The 1801
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 1802
Forms 1803
Definition 12.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality). 1804
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1808
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1809
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 1810
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and 1811
|Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1812
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1813
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1814
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 1815
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and 1816
|Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 1817
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1818
e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic 1819
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1820
Definition 12.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDuality). 1821
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1824
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for 1826
an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 1827
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 1828
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1831
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1832
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 1835
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 1836
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1839
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1840
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1841
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperDuality, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperDuality and 1842
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 1843
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1848
Extreme coefficient; 1849
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1850
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperDuality, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperDuality, 1851
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the 1853
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients 1854
defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 1855
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1859
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1861
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1866
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1868
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Neutrosophic 1869
Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality; 1876
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1877
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1885
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1887
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 1893
SuperHyperDuality; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 1896
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 1901
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 1902
a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. 1903
Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one 1904
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, 1905
V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge 1906
has it as a Neutrosophic endpoint. Thus the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex, V3 , 1907
is excluded in every given Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 1908
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 1911
but E4 is a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic 1912
SuperHyperDuality. 1917


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 1980
ESHP : (V, E). Then 1981
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 1982
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 1986
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1990
Proposition 12.6. Assume a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle 1991
ESHC : (V, E). Then 1992
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 1993
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2004
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 2005
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2015
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 2018
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 2023
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 2024
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2025
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2026
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2027
solution 2030
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2037

= {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 2040
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2041

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2047
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2052
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperDuality. 2060
ESHW : (V, E). Then, 2062
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 2063
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 2064
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2065

∃!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 2070
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2071
13 Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin But As The 2078
Forms 2080
Definition 13.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin). 2081
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2085
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2086
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2087
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2088
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2090
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2091
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2092
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2093
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2095
e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2096
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2097
Definition 13.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperJoin). 2098
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, 2101
Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperJoin, and 2102
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2103
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2108
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2109
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a 2111
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2116
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2117
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperJoin, Neutrosophic 2118
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2119
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2125
coefficient; 2126
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2127
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2136
coefficient; 2137
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2138
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 2141
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 2142
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2145
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2146
Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin; 2153
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2154
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2162
coefficient; 2163
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2164
SuperHyperJoin; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its Neutrosophic 2173
coefficient. 2174
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2178
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges but 2179
E2 is a loop Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge and E4 is a Neutrosophic 2180
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperNeighbor, 2181
there’s only one Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Neutrosophic 2182
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Neutrosophic isolated means that there’s no 2183
SuperHyperJoin. 2186
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 2260
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2264
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2268

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

.
Proof. Let 2271
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2282
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 2283

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2293
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 2296
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 2301
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2302
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2303
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperBipartite 2305
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2306
solution 2308
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2315

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 2318
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2319

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2323
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2324
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2325
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2330
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperJoin. 2338

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

.
Proof. Let 2341
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2342

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2346
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2347
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2348
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2349
14 Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2356
Forms 2358
Definition 14.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect). 2359
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2363
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2364
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , 2365
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2366
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2368
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2369
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , 2370
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2371
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2373
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic 2374
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2375
Definition 14.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperPerfect). 2376
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2379
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for 2381
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2386
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2387
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2394
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2395
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2396
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperPerfect and 2397
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2403
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2405
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperPerfect, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperPerfect, 2406
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2414
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2416
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2421
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2423
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2424
Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect; 2431
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2432
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2440
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2442
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 2448
SuperHyperPerfect; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2451
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2456
SuperHyperPerfect. 2464
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 2538
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2542
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2546
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 2549
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

Then 2560
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2561

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2571
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 2574
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 2579
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2580
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2581
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2582
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2583
solution 2586
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2593

i
= (OTHERWISE).
{},
i
X
i
i=|P ESHG:(V,E) |
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
z min |Pi
i
= (OTHERWISE)0.
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , Vi
EXT ERN AL
∈ VPEXT
i
ERN AL
ESHG:(V,E) , i 6= j}.
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 2596
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2597

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2601
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2602
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2603
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
solution 2608
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect. 2616
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2619

is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2620

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2624
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2625
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2626
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2627
15 Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal But As The 2634
Forms 2636
Definition 15.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal). 2637
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2641
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2642
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2643
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2644
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2646
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2647
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2648
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and 2649
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2651
e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2652
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2653
Definition 15.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperTotal). 2654
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2657
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2659
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2664
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2665
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a 2667
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2672
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2673
Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperTotal, Neutrosophic 2674
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2681
coefficient; 2682
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2683
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2692
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2694
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2701
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2702
Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal; 2709
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2710
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2718
coefficient; 2719
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2720
SuperHyperTotal; and the Neutrosophic power is corresponded to its 2729
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 2734
SuperHyperTotal. 2742
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 2816
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2820
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2824
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 2827
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 2838
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 2839
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2849
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 2852
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2857
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2858
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2861
solution 2864
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2871

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 2874
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic 2875

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2879
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2880
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 2886
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperTotal. 2894
∗
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 2897
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel 2898

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2902
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2903
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2904
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2905
16 Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected But As 2912
The Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 2913
Forms 2914
Definition 16.1. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 2915
SuperHyperConnected). 2916
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected if 2920
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2921
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2922
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected if 2923
∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2924
that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2925
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected if 2927
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2928
that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2929
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected if 2930
∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2931
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2932
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2934
e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2935
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2936
Definition 16.2. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperConnected). 2937
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2940
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2942
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2943
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2944
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2945
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2947
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2948
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2951
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic 2952
Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2955
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2956
of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperConnected, 2957
Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and Neutrosophic 2958
rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2959
N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme 2960
coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme cardinality 2961
of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2962
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and 2964
the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; 2965
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2966
either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic 2967
re-SuperHyperConnected, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperConnected, and 2968
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 2969
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 2970
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 2971
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a 2972
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive 2973
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that 2974
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 2975
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient; 2976
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2977
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2980
Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2981
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of 2982
Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form 2983
the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2984
(vi) a Neutrosophic R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Neutrosophic 2985
C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum 2988
Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 2989
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; 2992
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2993
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 2996
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperPolynomial 2997
contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum 2998
Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 2999
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 3000
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 3002
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 3004
Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 3007
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial 3008
contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the 3009
maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a 3010
they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected; and the Neutrosophic power is 3013
corresponded to its Neutrosophic coefficient. 3014
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Neutrosophic Algorithm is Neutrosophicly 3018
SuperHyperConnected. 3026
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 3100
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 3104
Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 3108
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 3111
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 3122
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 3123
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

the Neutrosophic SuperHyperModel (25), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3133
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 3136
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3141
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3142
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Neutrosophic 3145
solution 3148
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
SuperHyperModel (26), is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3155
C(N SHG)Neutrosophic Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

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

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Proof. Let 3158
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3163
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3164
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
solution 3170
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnected. 3178
∗
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 3181
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 3183

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 3186
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 3187
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 3188
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 3189
17 Background 3197
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 3198
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 3199
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “New Ideas In Recognition of 3200
Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot” in Ref. [1] 3201
by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3202
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms with 3203
introducing used neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published 3204
in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Current Trends in Mass Communication 3205
(CTMC)” with ISO abbreviation “Curr Trends Mass Comm” in volume 2 and issue 1 3206
with pages 32-55. 3207
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3208
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3209
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3210
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3211
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3212
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3213
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3214
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3215
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3216
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3217
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3218
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3219
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3220
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3221
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3222
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3223
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3224
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3225
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3226
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3227
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3228
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3229
SuperHyperNumbers. 3230
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3231
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction to Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3232
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Beyond ” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). 3233
In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and 3234
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3235
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3236
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3237
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3238
Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 6 with pages 221-307. The research article studies 3239
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 3240
It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and 3241
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is 3242
titled “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super 3243
Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper 3244
Classes” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research article, a novel approach 3245
is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on 3246
fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of 3247
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3248
entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3249
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3250
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3252
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3253
SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled 3254
“neutrosophic co-degree and neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the 3255
setting of some classes related to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry 3256
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3257
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without 3258
using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3259
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer 3260
Science Research (JCTCSR)” with ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in 3261
choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3263
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background. The research 3264
article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic 3265
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3266
background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing 3267
Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3268
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3269
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett 3270
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3271
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3272
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3273
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3274
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [10] by 3275
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3276
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3277
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3278
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3279
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3280
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [12] by Henry 3281
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3282
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3283
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3284
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3285
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3286
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3287
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3288
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3289
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3290
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3291
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3292
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3293
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3294
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3295
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3296
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett 3297
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3298
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3299
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3300
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3301
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3302
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3303
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [21] by 3304
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3305
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [22] by 3306
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3307
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3308
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3309
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3310
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3311
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3312
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3313
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3314
Treatments” in Ref. [25] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3315
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3316
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [26] by Henry Garrett 3317
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3318
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [201] by Henry 3319
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3320
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3321
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [202] by Henry Garrett 3322
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3323
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3324
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [203] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3325
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3326
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3327
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [204] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3328
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3329
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [207] by 3330
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3331
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3332
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [208] by Henry 3333
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3334
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3335
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [211] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3336
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3337
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [214] by Henry 3338
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3339
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3340
in Ref. [215] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3341
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3342
Ref. [216] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3343
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3344
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [217] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3345
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3346
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [218] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3347
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3348
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [219] by Henry Garrett 3349
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3350
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [230] by Henry 3351
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3352
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3353
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [231] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–231], there 3354
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3355
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3356
at [232–360]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3357
readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [361, 362]. 3358
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3359
proposed as book in Ref. [361] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3360
Scholar and has more than 4728 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3361
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3362
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3363
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3364
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3365
proposed as book in Ref. [362] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3366
Scholar and has more than 5721 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3367
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3368
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3369
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3370
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3371
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3372
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3373
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3374
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3375
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–231] 3376
alongside scientific research books at [232–360]. Two popular scientific research books 3377
in Scribd ,in the terms of high readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic 3378
science is on [361, 362]. 3379
References 3380
1. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3381
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Curr Trends Mass Comm 3382
2(1) (2023) 32-55. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/new- 3383
ideas-in-recognition-of-cancer-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-as-hyper- 3384
tool-on-super-toot.pdf) 3385
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3386
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3387
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3388
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3389
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3390
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3391
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3392
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3393
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3394
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3395
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3396
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3397
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3398
SuperHyperFunction to Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3399
Neutrosophic Recognition and Beyond ”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(6) 3400
(2023) 221-307. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access- 3401
articles/neutrosophic-1failed-superhyperforcing-in-the-superhyperfunction-to- 3402
use-neutrosophic-superhypergraphs-on-cancers-neutros.pdf) 3403
5. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3404
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3405
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. (doi: 3406
10.33140/JCTCSR.02.01.04) 3407
6. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3408
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3409
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3410
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3411
7. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3412
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3413
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3414
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3415
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3416
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3417
8. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3418
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3419
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3420
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3421
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3422
9. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3423
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3424
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3425
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3426
10. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3427
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3428
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3429
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3430
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3431
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3432
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3433
12. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3434
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3435
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3436
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3437
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3438
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3439
13. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3440
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3441
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3442
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3443
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3444
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3445
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3446
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3447
15. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3448
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3449
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3450
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3451
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3452
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3453
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3454
17. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3455
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3456
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3457
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3458
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3460
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3461
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3462
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3463
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3464
20. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3465
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3466
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3468
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3472
22. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3473
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3474
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3475
23. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3476
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3477
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3478
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3479
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3480
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3481
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3482
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3483
25. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3484
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3485
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3486
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3487
26. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3488
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3489
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3490
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3491
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple 3493
On Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8092796). 3494
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Reverse 3495
Strict Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3496
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8092766). 3497
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3499
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8088438). 3500
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Unequal 3501
Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3502
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3505
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8084436). 3506
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Strict 3507
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super 3511
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080100). 3512
34. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse Strict 3513
Connective In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3514
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080068). 3515
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3517
Super Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8078445). 3518
36. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Unequal 3519
Connective Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3520
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3523
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Strict 3525
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3529
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8072171). 3530
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Reverse 3531
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3535
42. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Equal 3537
SuperHyperGraph By Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3541
44. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Dimension 3543
Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3544
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3547
46. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse 3549
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3553
48. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Equal 3555
SuperHyperGraph By Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On Super 3559
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8051346). 3560
50. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Connective 3561
SuperHyperGraph By United Dominating As Hyper Ultra On Super Units”, 3565
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Units By Hyper Ultra Of United 3567
SuperHyperGraph By Zero Forcing As Hyper ford On Super forceps”, Zenodo 3571
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8017246). 3572
54. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super forceps By Hyper ford Of Zero Forcing In 3573
Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3574
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020128). 3575
SuperHyperGraph By Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super matte”, Zenodo 3577
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978571). 3578
56. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super mat By Hyper matte Of Matrix-Based In 3579
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3580
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978857). 3581
SuperHyperGraph By Dominating-Edges As Hyper Dome On Super Eddy”, 3583
58. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Dome Of 3585
Dominating-Edges In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3586
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab”, Zenodo 2023, 3589
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595). 3590
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gab By Hyper Gape Of Edge-Gap In 3591
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923632). 3593
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3595
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3596
62. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3597
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3598
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3601
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3602
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3603
64. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3604
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3605
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3606
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3607
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3609
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3610
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3612
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3615
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3618
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3621
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3622
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3624
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3627
72. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3629
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3630
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3633
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3636
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3639
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3640
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3642
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3645
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3646
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3648
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3651
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3654
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3657
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3660
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3663
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3664
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3666
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3667
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3669
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3670
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3672
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3675
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3678
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3679
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3681
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3684
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3685
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3686
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3688
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3689
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3691
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3692
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3693
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3694
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3697
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3700
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3701
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3703
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3704
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3706
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3709
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3712
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3715
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3718
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3721
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3724
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3727
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3730
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3732
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3733
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3734
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3736
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3739
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3740
109. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3741
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3743
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3745
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3748
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3751
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3752
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3754
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3755
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3757
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3758
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3759
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3760
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3761
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3763
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3766
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3769
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3770
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3772
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3775
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3777
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3779
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3781
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3783
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3784
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3787
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3789
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3790
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3793
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3795
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3797
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3799
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3801
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3802
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3805
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3806
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3808
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3811
133. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3813
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3815
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3817
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3818
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3820
136. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3822
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3824
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3826
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3827
138. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3828
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3829
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3830
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3832
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3833
140. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3834
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3835
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3838
142. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3840
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3841
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3844
144. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3846
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3847
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3850
146. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3852
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3854
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3856
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3857
148. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3858
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3859
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3862
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3863
150. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3864
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3865
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3868
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3869
152. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3870
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3871
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3874
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3875
154. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3876
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3877
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3880
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3881
156. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3882
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3883
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3886
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3887
158. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3888
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3889
159. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3891
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3892
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3895
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3896
161. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3897
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3898
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3901
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3902
163. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3903
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3904
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3907
165. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3909
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3910
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3913
167. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3915
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3916
168. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3918
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3919
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3922
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3925
171. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3927
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3928
172. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3930
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3931
173. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3933
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3934
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3935
174. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3936
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3937
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3938
175. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3939
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3940
176. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3942
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3943
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3944
177. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3945
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3946
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3947
178. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3948
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3949
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3950
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3951
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3954
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3955
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3958
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3959
181. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3960
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3962
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3963
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3966
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3967
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3970
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3971
184. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3972
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3973
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3974
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3975
185. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3976
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3977
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3978
186. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3979
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3980
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3981
187. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3982
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3983
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3984
188. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3985
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3986
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3987
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3988
189. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3989
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3990
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3991
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3992
190. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3993
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3994
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3995
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3996
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3997
191. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3998
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3999
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 4000
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 4001
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 4002
192. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 4003
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 4004
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 4005
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 4006
193. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 4007
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 4008
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 4009
194. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 4010
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 4011
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 4013
195. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 4014
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 4015
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 4016
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 4017
196. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 4018
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 4019
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 4020
197. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 4021
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 4022
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 4023
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 4024
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 4025
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 4026
198. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 4027
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 4028
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 4029
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 4030
199. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 4031
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 4032
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 4033
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 4034
200. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 4035
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 4036
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 4037
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 4038
201. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 4039
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 4040
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 4041
202. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 4042
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 4043
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 4044
203. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4046
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4047
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4048
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4049
204. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 4050
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 4051
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 4052
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 4053
205. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 4054
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 4055
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4056
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 4057
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4059
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4060
207. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 4061
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 4062
208. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 4064
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 4065
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 4066
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 4071
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 4075
211. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 4076
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 4077
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 4078
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 4079
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 4082
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 4084
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 4085
214. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 4086
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 4087
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 4090
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 4091
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 4093
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 4094
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4097
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 4098
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4100
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 4101
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 4104
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 4105
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 4107
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 4108
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 4110
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 4115
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 4116
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 4120
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 4121
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 4124
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 4127
226. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4128
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4129
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 4130
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 4131
227. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 4132
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 4133
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4134
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 4135
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 4138
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 4139
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4142
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 4143
230. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 4144
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 4145
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 4146
231. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 4147
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 4148
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 4149
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 4150
232. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4151
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8092816). 4152
233. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4153
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8090194). 4154
234. Henry Garrett, “Strict Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4155
235. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Strict Connective In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4157
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080167). 4158
236. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4159
237. Henry Garrett, “Strict Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4161
238. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4163
239. Henry Garrett, “Equal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4165
240. Henry Garrett, “Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4167
241. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4169
242. Henry Garrett, “Equal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4171
243. Henry Garrett, “Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4173
244. Henry Garrett, “United Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4175
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8027488). 4176
245. Henry Garrett, “Zero Forcing In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4177
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020181). 4178
246. Henry Garrett, “Matrix-Based In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4179
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978921). 4180
247. Henry Garrett, “Collections of Math II”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4181
10.5281/zenodo.7943878). 4182
248. Henry Garrett, “Dominating-Edges In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4183
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943871). 4184
249. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Gap In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4185
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923786). 4186
250. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4187
251. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4189
252. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4191
253. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4193
254. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4195
255. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4197
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 4198
256. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4199
257. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4201
258. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4203
259. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4205
260. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4207
261. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4209
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4210
262. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4211
263. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4213
264. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4215
265. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4217
266. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4219
267. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4221
268. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4223
269. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4225
270. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4227
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4228
271. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4229
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4230
272. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4231
273. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4233
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4234
274. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4235
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4236
275. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4237
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4238
276. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4239
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4240
277. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4241
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4242
278. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4243
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4244
279. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4245
280. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4247
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4248
281. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4249
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4250
282. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4251
283. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4253
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4254
284. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4255
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4256
285. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4257
286. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4259
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4260
287. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4261
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4262
288. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4263
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4264
289. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4265
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4266
290. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4267
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4268
291. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4269
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4270
292. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4271
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4272
293. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4273
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4274
294. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4275
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4276
295. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4277
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4278
296. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4279
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4280
297. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4281
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4282
298. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4283
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4284
299. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4285
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4286
300. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4287
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4288
301. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4289
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4290
302. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4291
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4292
303. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4293
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4294
304. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4295
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4296
305. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4297
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4298
306. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4299
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4300
307. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4301
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4302
308. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4303
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4304
309. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4305
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4306
310. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4307
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4308
311. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4309
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4310
312. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4311
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4312
313. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4313
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4314
314. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4315
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4316
315. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4317
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4318
316. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4319
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4320
317. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4321
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4322
318. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4323
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4324
319. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4325
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4326
320. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4327
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4328
321. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4329
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4330
322. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4331
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4332
323. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4333
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4334
324. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4335
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4336
325. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4337
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4338
326. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4339
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4340
327. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4341
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4342
328. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4343
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4344
329. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4345
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4346
330. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4347
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4348
331. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4349
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4350
332. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4351
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4352
333. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4353
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4354
334. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4355
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4356
335. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4357
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4358
336. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4359
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4360
337. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4361
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4362
338. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4363
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4364
339. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4365
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4366
340. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4367
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4368
341. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4369
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4370
342. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4371
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4372
343. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4373
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4374
344. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4375
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4376
345. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4377
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4378
346. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4379
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4380
347. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4381
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4382
348. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4383
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4384
349. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4385
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4386
350. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4387
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4388
351. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4389
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4390
352. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4391
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4392
353. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4393
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4394
354. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4395
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4396
355. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4397
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4398
356. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4399
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4400
357. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4401
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4402
358. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4403
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4404
359. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4405
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4406
360. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4407
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4408
361. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4409
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4410
362. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4411
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4412
View publication stats

New Ideas in Recognition of Cancer and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph by SuperHyperPerfect Search As Hyper Perf On Super Perfidy

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 SuperHyperPerfect Search As Hyper Perf On Super Perfidy

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 · July 2023

524 PUBLICATIONS 25,200 CITATIONS

On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project

Featured Articles View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 2

SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect Search As Hyper 3

Perf On Super Perfidy 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

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S 10

is a SuperHyperPerfect Search pair S = (V, E). Consider a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet 11

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

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 13

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 14

Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 15

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 16

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

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 18

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 19

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is called 20

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 21

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

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 23

Search, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 24

v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 25

((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). Assume a Neutrosophic 26

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

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

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 29

Search, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 30

v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 31

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

Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 34

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s 36

either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 37

re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and 38

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 39

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 41

Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic 42

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 43

Search; an Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 44

Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 45

re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and 46

Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 47

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

Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme number of the maximum Extreme 49

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

Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 51

SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 52

and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme coefficient; a Neutrosophic 53

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of Neutrosophic 54

e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 55

Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and Neutrosophic 56

rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph 57

N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic 58

coefficients defined as the Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic 59

cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S 60

of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 61