New Ideas On Super Perfidy by Hyper Perf of SuperHyperPerfect Search in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/371982733
New Ideas On Super Perﬁdy By Hyper Perf Of SuperHyperPerfect Search In

Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph
Preprint · July 2023

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8104857
CITATIONS
1 author:
Henry Garrett
525 PUBLICATIONS 25,367 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Featured Articles View project
On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures 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 On Super Perfidy By Hyper Perf Of 2
SuperHyperPerfect Search In Recognition of Cancer With 3
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 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 “Extreme 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 “Extreme SuperHyperGraphs”. The cancer is the disease but the model is going 248
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 Extreme 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
Extreme 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 an 270
Extreme SuperHyperPath (-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, SuperHyperStar, 271
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to find 272
either the optimal SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search or the Extreme 273
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in those Extreme SuperHyperModels. Some general 274
results are introduced. Beyond that in SuperHyperStar, all possible Extreme 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 “Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” on 290
“SuperHyperGraph” and “Extreme SuperHyperGraph”. Then the research has taken 291
more motivations to define SuperHyperClasses and to find some connections amid this 292
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 Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, are figured out in sections “ 304
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” and “Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”. In the 305
sense of tackling on getting results and in SuperHyperPerfect Search to make sense about 306
continuing the research, the ideas of SuperHyperUniform and Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. As going back 310
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 Extreme 312
SuperHyperGraph, in the sections “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results on 313
Extreme 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
“Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”, “Results on SuperHyperClasses” and “Results 319
on Extreme SuperHyperClasses”. There are curious questions about what’s done about 320
the SuperHyperNotions to make sense about excellency of this research and going to 321
figure out the word “best” as the description and adjective for this research as presented 322
in section, “ SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search”. The keyword of this research debut in the 323
section “Applications in Cancer’s Recognition” with two cases and subsections “Case 1: 324
The Initial Steps Toward SuperHyperBipartite as SuperHyperModel” and “Case 2: The 325
Increasing Steps Toward SuperHyperMultipartite as SuperHyperModel”. In the section, 326
“Open Problems”, there are some scrutiny and discernment on what’s done and what’s 327
happened in this research in the terms of “questions” and “problems” to make sense to 328
figure out this research in featured style. The advantages and the limitations of this 329
research alongside about what’s done in this research to make sense and to get sense 330
about what’s figured out are included in the section, “Conclusion and Closing Remarks”. 331
3 Extreme Preliminaries Of This Scientific 332
Research On the Redeemed Ways 333
In this section, the basic material in this scientific research, is referred to [Single Valued 334
Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2), [Neutrosophic Set](Ref. [1],Definition 335
2.1,p.1), [Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.5,p.2), 336
[Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 337
2.7,p.3), [t-norm](Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3), and [Characterization of the 338
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)](Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3), [Neutrosophic 339
Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths] (Ref. [1],Definition 5.3,p.7), and 340
[Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE)] 341
(Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are addressed 342
to Ref. [231]. 343
In this subsection, the basic material which is used in this scientific research, is 344
presented. Also, the new ideas and their clarifications are elicited. 345
Definition 3.1 (Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.1,p.1). 346
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 347
+
]− 0, 1 [. 348
Definition 3.2 (Single Valued Neutrosophic Set). (Ref. [1],Definition 2.2,p.2). 349
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 350
2.5,p.2). 351
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 352
pair S = (V, E), where 353
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 354
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 355
1, 2, . . . , n); 356
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 357
V; 358
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 359
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 360
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 361
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 362
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 363
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n );
0 364
(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 . 365
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 366
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 367
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 368
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 369
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 370
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 371
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 372
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 373
the ii0 th element of the SuperHyperPerfect Search of Neutrosophic 374
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 375
and E are crisp sets. 376
Definition 3.6 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 377
(Ref. [1],Definition 2.7,p.3). 378
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 379
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 380
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 381
characterized as follow-up items. 382
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 383
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 384
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 385
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 386
HyperEdge; 387
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 388
SuperEdge; 389
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 390
SuperHyperEdge. 391
If we choose different types of binary operations, then we could get hugely diverse 392
types of general forms of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG). 393
Definition 3.7 (t-norm). (Ref. [1], Definition 2.7, p.3). 394
A binary operation ⊗ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1] is a t-norm if it satisfies the following 395
for x, y, z, w ∈ [0, 1]: 396
(i) 1 ⊗ x = x; 397
(ii) x ⊗ y = y ⊗ x; 398
(iii) x ⊗ (y ⊗ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊗ z; 399
(iv) If w ≤ x and y ≤ z then w ⊗ y ≤ x ⊗ z. 400
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)). 401
Assume V 0 is a given set. a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a 402
pair S = (V, E), where 403
(i) V = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vn } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of V 0 ; 404
(ii) V = {(Vi , TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi )) : TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), FV 0 (Vi ) ≥ 0}, (i = 405
1, 2, . . . , n); 406
(iii) E = {E1 , E2 , . . . , En0 } a finite set of finite single valued Neutrosophic subsets of 407
V; 408
(iv) E = {(Ei0 , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )) : TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 ) ≥ 0}, (i0 = 409
1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 410
(v) Vi 6= ∅, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 411
(vi) Ei0 6= ∅, (i0 = 1, 2, . . . , n0 ); 412
P
(vii) i supp(Vi ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n); 413
0 0
P
(viii) i0 supp(Ei ) = V, (i = 1, 2, . . . , n ).
0 414
Here the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ej 0 and the Neutrosophic 415
SuperHyperVertices (NSHV) Vj are single valued Neutrosophic sets. TV 0 (Vi ), IV 0 (Vi ), 416
and FV 0 (Vi ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 417
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership the Neutrosophic 418
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V. 419
TV0 (Ei0 ), TV0 (Ei0 ), and TV0 (Ei0 ) denote the degree of truth-membership, the degree of 420
indeterminacy-membership and the degree of falsity-membership of the Neutrosophic 421
SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) Ei0 to the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E. Thus, 422
the ii0 th element of the SuperHyperPerfect Search of Neutrosophic 423
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) are of the form (Vi , TV0 (Ei0 ), IV0 (Ei0 ), FV0 (Ei0 )), the sets V 424
and E are crisp sets. 425
Definition 3.11 (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)). 426
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). The 428
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges (NSHE) Ei0 and the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices 429
(NSHV) Vi of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S = (V, E) could be 430
characterized as follow-up items. 431
(i) If |Vi | = 1, then Vi is called vertex; 432
(ii) if |Vi | ≥ 1, then Vi is called SuperVertex; 433
(iii) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called edge; 434
(iv) if for all Vi s are incident in Ei0 , |Vi | = 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 435
HyperEdge; 436
(v) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | = 2, then Ei0 is called 437
SuperEdge; 438
(vi) if there’s a Vi is incident in Ei0 such that |Vi | ≥ 1, and |Ei0 | ≥ 2, then Ei0 is called 439
SuperHyperEdge. 440
This SuperHyperModel is too messy and too dense. Thus there’s a need to have 441
some restrictions and conditions on SuperHyperGraph. The special case of this 442
SuperHyperGraph makes the patterns and regularities. 443
Definition 3.12. A graph is SuperHyperUniform if it’s SuperHyperGraph and the 444
number of elements of SuperHyperEdges are the same. 445
To get more visions on SuperHyperUniform, the some SuperHyperClasses are 446
introduced. It makes to have SuperHyperUniform more understandable. 447
Definition 3.13. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. There are some 448
SuperHyperClasses as follows. 449
(i). It’s Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath if it’s only one SuperVertex as 450
intersection amid two given SuperHyperEdges with two exceptions; 451
(ii). it’s SuperHyperCycle if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 452
given SuperHyperEdges; 453
(iii). it’s SuperHyperStar it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid all 454
SuperHyperEdges; 455
(iv). it’s SuperHyperBipartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 456
given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming two separate sets, has 457
no SuperHyperEdge in common; 458
(v). it’s SuperHyperMultiPartite it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid 459
two given SuperHyperEdges and these SuperVertices, forming multi separate sets, 460
has no SuperHyperEdge in common; 461
(vi). it’s SuperHyperWheel if it’s only one SuperVertex as intersection amid two 462
given SuperHyperEdges and one SuperVertex has one SuperHyperEdge with any 463
common SuperVertex. 464
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 465
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) V1 to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vs if either 466
of following conditions hold: 467
(i) Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 468
(ii) there’s a vertex vi ∈ Vi such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 469
(iii) there’s a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi such that Vi0 , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 470
(iv) there’s a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 471
0 0
(v) there’s a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 472
(vi) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 473
0 0
(vii) there are a vertex vi ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 474
(viii) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a vertex vi+1 ∈ Vi+1 such that Vi0 , vi+1 ∈ Ei0 ; 475
(ix) there are a SuperVertex Vi0 ∈ Vi and a SuperVertex Vi+1

0
∈ Vi+1 such that 476
0 0
Vi , Vi+1 ∈ Ei0 . 477
Definition 3.15. (Characterization of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 478
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. 479
(i) If for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | = 2, then NSHP is called path; 480
(ii) if for all Ej 0 , |Ej 0 | = 2, and there’s Vi , |Vi | ≥ 1, then NSHP is called SuperPath; 481
(iii) if for all Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | = 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called HyperPath; 482
(iv) if there are Vi , Ej 0 , |Vi | ≥ 1, |Ej 0 | ≥ 2, then NSHP is called Neutrosophic 483
SuperHyperPath . 484
Definition 3.16 (Neutrosophic Strength of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperPaths). 485
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 487
(i) Neutrosophic t-strength (min{T (Vi )}, m, n)si=1 ; 488
(ii) Neutrosophic i-strength (m, min{I(Vi )}, n)si=1 ; 489
(iii) Neutrosophic f-strength (m, n, min{F (Vi )})si=1 ; 490
(iv) Neutrosophic strength (min{T (Vi )}, min{I(Vi )}, min{F (Vi )})si=1 . 491
Definition 3.17 (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges 492
(NSHE)). (Ref. [1],Definition 5.4,p.7). 493
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 494
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 495
(ix) Neutrosophic t-Connective if T (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 496
t-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 497
(NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s; 498
(x) Neutrosophic i-Connective if I(E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 499
i-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 500
(xi) Neutrosophic f-Connective if F (E) ≥ maximum number of Neutrosophic 502
f-strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex 503
(xii) Neutrosophic Connective if (T (E), I(E), F (E)) ≥ maximum number of 505
Neutrosophic strength of SuperHyperPath (NSHP) from Neutrosophic 506
SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vi to Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertex (NSHV) Vj 507
where 1 ≤ i, j ≤ s. 508
Definition 3.18. (Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic 509
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). 510
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then 512
either V 0 or E 0 is called 513
(i) Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is 514
called Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 515
(ii) Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression 516
is called Neutrosophic re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 517
and |Ei |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Ej |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 518
(iii) Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression is 519
called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 520
(iv) Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the following expression 521
is called Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search criteria holds 522
and |Vi |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY = |Vj |NEUTROSOPHIC CARDINALITY ; 523
(v) Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 524
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 527
Definition 3.19. ((Neutrosophic) SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). 528
a Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 530
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 531
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 534
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 535
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 536
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 537
SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 538
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 539
(ii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 540
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a Neutrosophic 543
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of 544
the Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 545
Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges and 546
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 548
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if 549
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 550
re-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic v-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 551
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an 552
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 553
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Extreme coefficients defined as the Extreme 554
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of 555
an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 556
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; and the Extreme power is corresponded 558
to its Extreme coefficient; 559
(iv) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial 560
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 561
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for a 563
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 564
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 565
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 566
Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdges of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 567
Neutrosophic coefficient; 571
(v) an Extreme V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of Neutrosophic 572
rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an Extreme 575
SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an 576
Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 577
SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 578
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 580
(vi) a Neutrosophic V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if it’s either of 581
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Neutrosophic 585
cardinality of the Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic 586
SuperHyperSet S of high Neutrosophic cardinality consecutive Neutrosophic 587
SuperHyperEdges and Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the 588
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 589
(vii) an Extreme V-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial if 590
it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 591
and Neutrosophic rv-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and C(N SHG) for an 593
number of the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 596
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme 597
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; and the Extreme power is corresponded 599
to its Extreme coefficient; 600
(viii) a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial 601
if it’s either of Neutrosophic e-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Neutrosophic 602
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Neutrosophic 605
SuperHyperPolynomial contains the Neutrosophic coefficients defined as the 606
Neutrosophic number of the maximum Neutrosophic cardinality of the 607
Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices of a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSet S of high 608
Neutrosophic coefficient. 612
Definition 3.20. ((Extreme/Neutrosophic)δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search). 613
Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Then 614
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 615
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search such that either of the following expressions hold 616
for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 617
|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 618
Expression (3.1), holds if S is an δ−SuperHyperDefensive; 619
(ii) a Neutrosophic δ−SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is a Neutrosophic kind of 620
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search such that either of the following 621
Neutrosophic expressions hold for the Neutrosophic cardinalities of 622
SuperHyperNeighbors of s ∈ S : 623
|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. 624
And the Expression (3.1), holds if S is a Neutrosophic 625
δ−SuperHyperDefensive. 626
For the sake of having a Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s a need 627
to “redefine” the notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”. The 628
SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels from the 629
letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of labels to 630
assign to the values. 631
Definition 3.21. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 632
S = (V, E). It’s redefined Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph if the Table (1) holds. 633
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of SuperHyperClasses. Since there’s 634
more ways to get Neutrosophic type-results to make a Neutrosophic more 635
understandable. 636
Definition 3.22. Assume a Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 637
S = (V, E). There are some Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses if the Table (2) 638
holds. Thus Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath , SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 639
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 640
SuperHyperWheel, are Neutrosophic SuperHyperPath, Neutrosophic 641
SuperHyperCycle, Neutrosophic SuperHyperStar, Neutrosophic 642
SuperHyperBipartite, Neutrosophic SuperHyperMultiPartite, and 643
Neutrosophic SuperHyperWheel if the Table (2) holds. 644
It’s useful to define a “Neutrosophic” version of a Neutrosophic 645
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Since there’s more ways to get type-results to make a 646
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search more Neutrosophicly understandable. 647

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 648
to “redefine” the Neutrosophic notion of “Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 649
Search”. The SuperHyperVertices and the SuperHyperEdges are assigned by the labels 650
from the letters of the alphabets. In this procedure, there’s the usage of the position of 651
labels to assign to the values. 652
Definition 3.23. Assume a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. It’s redefined a 653
Neutrosophic SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if the Table (3) holds. 654
4 Extreme SuperHyper But As The

SuperHyperPerfect Search 655
Extensions Excerpt From Dense And Super 656
Forms 657
Definition 4.1. (Extreme event). 658
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 659
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Any Extreme k-subset of A of V is called 660
Extreme k-event and if k = 2, then Extreme subset of A of V is called Extreme 661
event. The following expression is called Extreme probability of A. 662
X
E(A) = E(a). (4.1)
a∈A
Definition 4.2. (Extreme Independent). 663
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. s Extreme k-events Ai , i ∈ I is called 665
Extreme s-independent if the following expression is called Extreme 666
s-independent criteria 667
Y
E(∩i∈I Ai ) = P (Ai ).
i∈I
And if s = 2, then Extreme k-events of A and B is called Extreme independent. 668
The following expression is called Extreme independent criteria 669
E(A ∩ B) = P (A)P (B). (4.2)
Definition 4.3. (Extreme Variable). 670
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Any k-function SuperHyperPerfect Search like E 672
is called Extreme k-Variable. If k = 2, then any 2-function SuperHyperPerfect Search like E 673
is called Extreme Variable. 674
The notion of independent on Extreme Variable is likewise. 675
Definition 4.4. (Extreme Expectation). 676
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. an Extreme k-Variable E has a number 678
is called Extreme Expectation if the following expression is called Extreme 679
Expectation criteria 680
X
Ex(E) = E(α)P (α).
α∈V
Definition 4.5. (Extreme Crossing). 681
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. an Extreme number is called Extreme 683
Crossing if the following expression is called Extreme Crossing criteria 684
Cr(S) = min{Number of Crossing in a Plane Embedding of S}.
Lemma 4.6. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 685
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let m and n propose special 686
SuperHyperPerfect Search. Then with m ≥ 4n, 687
Proof. Consider a planar embedding G of G with cr(G) crossings. Let S be an Extreme 688
random k-subset of V obtained by choosing each SuperHyperVertex of G Extreme 689
independently with probability SuperHyperPerfect Search p := 4n/m, and set H := G[S] and 690
H := G[S]. 691
Define random variables X, Y, Z on V as follows: X is the Extreme number of

SuperHyperVertices, Y the Extreme number of SuperHyperEdges, and Z the Extreme
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 Extreme 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: 692
pm − 3n n 1 3 2
cr(G) ≥ = 3 = 64 m n .
p3 (4n/m)
693
Theorem 4.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). 694
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 695
points in the plane, and let l be the Extreme number of SuperHyperLines√ in the plane 696
passing through at least k + 1 of these points, where 1 ≤ k ≤ 2 2n. Then l < 32n2 /k 3 . 697
Proof. Form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet 698
P whose SuperHyperEdge are the segments between consecutive points on the 699
SuperHyperLines which pass through at least k + 1 points of P. This Extreme 700
SuperHyperGraph has at least kl SuperHyperEdges and Extreme crossing at most l 701
choose two. Thus either kl < 4n, in which case l < 4n/k ≤ 32n2 /k 3 , or 702
3
l2 /2 > l choose 2 ≥ cr(G) ≥ (kl) /64n2 by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and again 703
l < 32n2 /k 3 . 704
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let P be a SuperHyperSet of n 706
points in the plane, and let k be the number of pairs of points of P at unit 707
SuperHyperDistance. Then k < 5n4/3 . 708
Proof. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider 709
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Draw a SuperHyperUnit 710
SuperHyperCircle around each SuperHyperPoint of P. Let ni be the Extreme number of 711

P n−1
these SuperHyperCircles passing through exactly i points of P. Then i = 0 ni = n 712
and k = 21 i = 0n−1 ini . Now form an Extreme SuperHyperGraph H with

P
713
SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet P whose SuperHyperEdges are the SuperHyperArcs 714
between consecutive SuperHyperPoints on the SuperHyperCircles that pass through at 715
least three SuperHyperPoints of P. Then 716
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 717
SuperHyperEdges. Delete from H one of each SuperHyperPair of parallel 718
SuperHyperEdges, so as to obtain a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph G with 719
e(G) ≥ k − n. Now cr(G) ≤ n(n − 1) because G is formed from at most n 720
SuperHyperCircles, and any two SuperHyperCircles cross at most twice. Thus either 721
3
e(G) < 4n, in which case k < 5n < 5n4/3 , or n2 > n(n − 1) ≥ cr(G) ≥ (k − n) /64n2 722
by the Extreme Crossing Lemma, and k < 4n4/3 + n < 5n4/3 . 723
Proposition 4.9. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 724
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let X be a 725
nonnegative Extreme Variable and t a positive real number. Then 726
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. 727
Corollary 4.10. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 728
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let Xn be a 729
nonnegative integer-valued variable in a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If 730
E(Xn ) → 0 as n → ∞, then P (Xn = 0) → 1 as n → ∞. 731
Proof. 732
Theorem 4.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair 733
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A special 734
SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability number at most d2p−1 log ne. 735
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. A special SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p is 737
up. Let G ∈ Gn,p and let S be a given SuperHyperSet of k + 1 SuperHyperVertices of 738
G, where k ∈ N. The probability that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G is 739
(1 − p)(k+1)choose2 , this being the probability that none of the (k + 1)choose2 pairs of 740
SuperHyperVertices of S is a SuperHyperEdge of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph G. 741
Let AS denote the event that S is a stable SuperHyperSet of G, and let XS denote 742
the indicator Extreme Variable for this Extreme Event. By equation, we have 743
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 744
X
X= {XS : S ⊆ V, |S| = k + 1}
and so, by those, 745
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: 746
k+1
n
(n choose k+1) ≤ and1 − p ≤ e−p .
(k + 1)!
This yields the following upper bound on E(X). 747
k+1 −p)(k+1)choose2 −pk/2k+1

n e ne
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 748
grows at least as fast as the logarithm of n, implies that E(X) → 0 as n → ∞. Because 749
X is integer-valued and nonnegative, we deduce from Corollary that P (X = 0) → 1 as 750
n → ∞. Consequently, an Extreme SuperHyperGraph in Gn,p almost surely has stability 751
number at most k. 752
Definition 4.12. (Extreme Variance). 753
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. an Extreme k-Variable E has a number 755
is called Extreme Variance if the following expression is called Extreme Variance 756
criteria 757
2
V x(E) = Ex((X − Ex(X)) ).
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let X be an Extreme 759
Variable and let t be a positive real number. Then 760
V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) ≤ .
t2
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let X be an Extreme Variable and let t 762
be a positive real number. Then 763
2
2 Ex((X − Ex(X)) ) V (X)
E(|X − Ex(X)| ≥ t) = E((X − Ex(X)) ≥ t2 ) ≤ 2
= .
t t2
764
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let Xn be an Extreme 766
Variable in a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search (Vn , En ), n ≥ 1. If Ex(Xn ) 6= 0 and 767
V (Xn ) << E 2 (Xn ), then 768
E(Xn = 0) → 0 as n → ∞
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Set X := Xn and t := |Ex(Xn )| in 770
Chebyshev’s Inequality, and observe that E(Xn = 0) ≤ E(|Xn − Ex(Xn )| ≥ |Ex(Xn )|) 771
because |Xn − Ex(Xn )| = |Ex(Xn )| when Xn = 0. 772
Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 . For 0 ≤ k ≤ n, set 774
f (k) := (n choose k)2−(k choose 2) and let k ∗ be the least value of k for which f (k) is 775
less than one. Then almost surely α(G) takes one of the three values k ∗ − 2, k ∗ − 1, k ∗ . 776
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. As in the proof of related Theorem, the 778
result is straightforward. 779
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let G ∈ Gn,1/2 and let 781
f and k ∗ be as defined in previous Theorem. Then either: 782
(i). f (k ∗ ) << 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 2 or k ∗ − 1, 783
or 784
(ii). f (k ∗ − 1) >> 1, in which case almost surely α(G) is equal to either k ∗ − 1 or k ∗ . 785
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. The latter is straightforward. 787
Definition 4.17. (Extreme Threshold). 788
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let P be a monotone property of 790
SuperHyperGraphs (one which is preserved when SuperHyperEdges are added). Then a 791
Extreme Threshold for P is a function f (n) such that: 792
(i). if p << f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely does not have P, 793
(ii). if p >> f (n), then G ∈ Gn,p almost surely has P. 794
Definition 4.18. (Extreme Balanced). 795
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let F be a fixed Extreme 797
SuperHyperGraph. Then there is a threshold function for the property of containing a 798
copy of F as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph is called Extreme Balanced. 799
S = (V, E). Consider S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let F be a nonempty 801
balanced Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph with k SuperHyperVertices and l 802
SuperHyperEdges. Then n−k/l is a threshold function for the property of containing F 803
as an Extreme SubSuperHyperGraph. 804
S = (V, E) is a probability SuperHyperPerfect Search. The latter is straightforward. 806
Figure 1. The Extreme SuperHyperGraphs Associated to the Extreme Notions of

Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Extreme Example (16.3)
Example 4.20. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E) 807
in the mentioned Extreme Figures in every Extreme items. 808
• On the Figure (1), the Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 809
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 810
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 811
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 812
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 813
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 814
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 815
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 816
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 817
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search =

{E4 , E2 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) + z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperPerfect Search =
{V1 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperPerfect Search SuperHyperPolynomial
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
818
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 Extreme SuperHyperNotion, namely, Extreme 819
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E4 is 821
an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, 822

there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme 823
SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme 824
SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 825
V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 826

{E4 }.
= z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
{V4 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
827
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)

straightforward. 830

{E4 }.
= z (0.14,0.14,0.14) .
{V3 }.
= z (0.13,0.13,0.13) .
831
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) .

835
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) .
839


{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) .
843

{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) .
847




{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) .
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) + 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
859

{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) .

863

{E1 , E4 }.
= 2z (0.26,0.26,0.26) .
{V1 , V2 , V3 , V7 , V8 }.
= z 5−a .
867

{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) .



871

{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) .
875

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


879

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
883

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
887




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

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

895

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


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

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


Proposition 4.21. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 908
The all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect 909
Search if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, some 910
interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors with 911
no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of 912
them. 913
Proposition 4.22. Assume a connected non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph 914
ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only 915
the maximum possibilities of the distinct interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside of 916
any given Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to 917
some of them but not all of them. In other words, there’s only an unique Extreme 918
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only two distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in 919
an Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of 920
them but not all of them. 921
Proposition 4.23. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If

an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then
the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is at 922
least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 923
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In other 924
words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the maximum 925
Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme SuperHyperPerfect 926
Search in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge with the 927
maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, has the Extreme 928
SuperHyperVertices are contained in an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. 929
Proposition 4.24. Assume a simple Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Then
the Extreme number of type-result-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search has, the least Extreme cardinality,
the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality, is the Extreme 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 an Extreme type-result-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the least Extreme cardinality, 930
the lower sharp Extreme bound for cardinality. 931
Proposition 4.25. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph 932
ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally, 933
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Is an Extreme type-result-SuperHyperPerfect Search. In other words, the least cardinality, the 934
lower sharp bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme type-result-SuperHyperPerfect Search is the 935
cardinality of 936

= {V1 , E1 , V2 , E2 , V3 , E3 , V4 , E4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 4 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch = {V1 , V2 , V3 , V4 , V1 }.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial = z 5 .
Proof. Assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The
SuperHyperSet of the SuperHyperVertices V \ V \ {z} isn’t a quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search
since neither amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges nor amount of SuperHyperVertices
where amount refers to the Extreme number of SuperHyperVertices(-/SuperHyperEdges)
more than one to form any kind of SuperHyperEdges or any number of
SuperHyperEdges. Let us consider the Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices has the eligibilities to

propose property such that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme
SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme
SuperHyperVertices but the maximum Extreme cardinality indicates that these
Extreme type-SuperHyperSets couldn’t give us the Extreme lower bound in the term of
Extreme sharpness. In other words, the Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperVertices implies at least on-quasi-triangle style is up but

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

contradiction to the supposition on the connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph
ESHG : (V, E). Thus the minimum case never happens in the generality of the
connected loopless Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the connected
loopless Extreme 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 937
least two SuperHyperVertices to form a SuperHyperEdge. It doesn’t withdraw the 938
principles of the main definition since there’s no condition to be satisfied but the 939
condition is on the existence of the SuperHyperEdge instead of acting on the 940
SuperHyperVertices. In other words, if there’s a SuperHyperEdge, then the Extreme 941
SuperHyperSet has the necessary condition for the intended definition to be applied. 942
Thus the V \ V \ {z} is withdrawn not by the conditions of the main definition but by 943
the necessity of the pre-condition on the usage of the main definition. 944
The Extreme structure of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search decorates the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices don’t have received any Extreme connections so as this Extreme
style implies different versions of Extreme SuperHyperEdges with the maximum
Extreme cardinality in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are spotlight. The
lower Extreme bound is to have the maximum Extreme groups of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have perfect Extreme connections inside each of SuperHyperEdges
and the outside of this Extreme SuperHyperSet doesn’t matter but regarding the
connectedness of the used Extreme SuperHyperGraph arising from its Extreme
properties taken from the fact that it’s simple. If there’s no more than one Extreme
SuperHyperVertex in the targeted Extreme SuperHyperSet, then there’s no Extreme
connection. Furthermore, the Extreme existence of one Extreme SuperHyperVertex has
no Extreme effect to talk about the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since at least two
Extreme SuperHyperVertices involve to make a title in the Extreme background of the
Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The Extreme SuperHyperGraph is obvious if it has no
Extreme SuperHyperEdge but at least two Extreme SuperHyperVertices make the
Extreme version of Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the Extreme setting of
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperGraph, there are at least one Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. It’s necessary to mention that the word “Simple” is used as Extreme
adjective for the initial Extreme SuperHyperGraph, induces there’s no Extreme
appearance of the loop Extreme version of the Extreme SuperHyperEdge and this
Extreme SuperHyperGraph is said to be loopless. The Extreme adjective “loop” on the
basic Extreme framework engages one Extreme SuperHyperVertex but it never happens
in this Extreme setting. With these Extreme bases, on an Extreme SuperHyperGraph,
there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge thus there’s at least an Extreme
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search has the Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge.
Thus, an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search has the Extreme cardinality at least an Extreme
SuperHyperEdge. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperSet V \ V \ {z}. This Extreme
SuperHyperSet isn’t an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search since either the Extreme
SuperHyperGraph is an obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel thus it never happens since
there’s no Extreme usage of this Extreme framework and even more there’s no Extreme
connection inside or the Extreme SuperHyperGraph isn’t obvious and as its
consequences, there’s an Extreme contradiction with the term “Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect
Search” since the maximum Extreme cardinality never happens for this Extreme style of
the Extreme SuperHyperSet and beyond that there’s no Extreme connection inside as
mentioned in first Extreme case in the forms of drawback for this selected Extreme
SuperHyperSet. Let
Comes up. This Extreme case implies having the Extreme style of on-quasi-triangle
Extreme style on the every Extreme elements of this Extreme SuperHyperSet. Precisely,
the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices such that some Extreme amount of the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices are on-quasi-triangle Extreme style. The Extreme cardinality of the
v SuperHypeSet
Is the maximum in comparison to the Extreme SuperHyperSet
But the lower Extreme bound is up. Thus the minimum Extreme cardinality of the
maximum Extreme cardinality ends up the Extreme discussion. The first Extreme term
refers to the Extreme setting of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph but this key point is
enough since there’s an Extreme SuperHyperClass of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph has
no on-quasi-triangle Extreme style amid some amount of its Extreme
SuperHyperVertices. This Extreme setting of the Extreme SuperHyperModel proposes
an Extreme SuperHyperSet has only some amount Extreme SuperHyperVertices from
one Extreme SuperHyperEdge such that there’s no Extreme amount of Extreme
SuperHyperEdges more than one involving these some amount of these Extreme
SuperHyperVertices. The Extreme cardinality of this Extreme SuperHyperSet is the
maximum and the Extreme case is occurred in the minimum Extreme situation. To sum
them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet
Has the maximum Extreme cardinality such that
Contains some Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s

distinct-covers-order-amount Extreme SuperHyperEdges for amount of Extreme
SuperHyperVertices taken from the Extreme SuperHyperSet
It means that the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices
Is an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph as used Extreme 945
background in the Extreme terms of worst Extreme case and the common theme of the 946
lower Extreme bound occurred in the specific Extreme SuperHyperClasses of the 947
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are Extreme free-quasi-triangle. 948
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has z Extreme number of

the Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Then every Extreme SuperHyperVertex has at least
no Extreme SuperHyperEdge with others in common. Thus those Extreme
SuperHyperVertices have the eligibles to be contained in an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect
Search. Those Extreme SuperHyperVertices are potentially included in an Extreme
style-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Formally, consider
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
Are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme 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
Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 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 Extreme SuperHyperVertices and there’s only and only
one Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) between the Extreme
SuperHyperVertices Zi and Zj . The other definition for the Extreme SuperHyperEdge
E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) in the terms of Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is
{aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE } .
This definition coincides with the definition of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search but
with slightly differences in the maximum Extreme cardinality amid those Extreme
type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus the Extreme
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
max |{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | Zi ∼ Zj , i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z}|Extreme cardinality ,

z
and
is formalized with mathematical literatures on the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Let

E
Zi ∼ Zj , be defined as Zi and Zj are the Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to the
Extreme 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, 949
Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search =

E
{Z1 , Z2 , . . . , Zz | ∀i 6= j, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , z, ∃Ex , Zi ∼x Zj , }.
950
Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search =

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

E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) is fixed that means Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) . for all Extreme intended
SuperHyperVertices but in an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search, Ex = E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
could be different and it’s not unique. To sum them up, in a connected Extreme
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). If an Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E)
has z Extreme SuperHyperVertices, then the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is at least
V \ (V \ {aE , bE , cE , . . . , zE }).
It’s straightforward that the Extreme cardinality of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is 951
at least the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the Extreme 952
SuperHyperEdges with the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges. In 953
other words, the maximum number of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges contains the 954
maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices are renamed to Extreme 955
SuperHyperPerfect Search in some cases but the maximum number of the Extreme 956
SuperHyperEdge with the maximum Extreme number of Extreme SuperHyperVertices, 957
has the Extreme SuperHyperVertices are contained in an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. 958
The obvious SuperHyperGraph has no Extreme SuperHyperEdges. But the 959
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperModel is up. The quasi-SuperHyperModel addresses 960
some issues about the Extreme optimal SuperHyperObject. It specially delivers some 961
remarks on the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that 962
there’s distinct amount of Extreme SuperHyperEdges for distinct amount of Extreme 963
SuperHyperVertices up to all taken from that Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 964
SuperHyperVertices but this Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 965
SuperHyperVertices is either has the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality or it 966
doesn’t have maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality. In a non-obvious 967
SuperHyperModel, there’s at least one Extreme SuperHyperEdge containing at least all 968
Extreme SuperHyperVertices. Thus it forms an Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search 969
where the Extreme completion of the Extreme incidence is up in that. Thus it’s, 970
literarily, an Extreme embedded R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The SuperHyperNotions of 971
embedded SuperHyperSet and quasi-SuperHyperSet coincide. In the original setting, 972
these types of SuperHyperSets only don’t satisfy on the maximum 973
SuperHyperCardinality. Thus the embedded setting is elected such that those 974
SuperHyperSets have the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality and they’re 975
Extreme SuperHyperOptimal. The less than two distinct types of Extreme 976
SuperHyperVertices are included in the minimum Extreme style of the embedded 977
Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The interior types of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 978
are deciders. Since the Extreme number of SuperHyperNeighbors are only affected by 979
the interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices. The common connections, more precise and 980
more formal, the perfect unique connections inside the Extreme SuperHyperSet for any 981
distinct types of Extreme SuperHyperVertices pose the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. 982
Thus Extreme exterior SuperHyperVertices could be used only in one Extreme 983
SuperHyperEdge and in Extreme SuperHyperRelation with the interior Extreme 984
SuperHyperVertices in that Extreme SuperHyperEdge. In the embedded Extreme 985
SuperHyperPerfect Search, there’s the usage of exterior Extreme SuperHyperVertices since 986
they’ve more connections inside more than outside. Thus the title “exterior” is more 987
relevant than the title “interior”. One Extreme SuperHyperVertex has no connection, 988
inside. Thus, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices with one 989
SuperHyperElement has been ignored in the exploring to lead on the optimal case 990
implying the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with 991
the exclusion of the exclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme 992
SuperHyperEdge and with other terms, the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the 993
inclusion of all Extreme SuperHyperVertices in one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, is an 994
Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. To sum them up, in a connected non-obvious 995
Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). There’s only one Extreme 996
SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has only the maximum possibilities of the distinct 997
interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside of any given Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect 998
Search minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. In 999
other words, there’s only an unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has 1000
only two distinct Extreme SuperHyperVertices in an Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect 1001
Search, minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to some of them but not all of them. 1002
The main definition of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search has two titles. an Extreme 1003
quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search and its corresponded quasi-maximum Extreme 1004
R-SuperHyperCardinality are two titles in the terms of quasi-R-styles. For any Extreme 1005
number, there’s an Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with that quasi-maximum 1006
Extreme SuperHyperCardinality in the terms of the embedded Extreme 1007
SuperHyperGraph. If there’s an embedded Extreme SuperHyperGraph, then the 1008
Extreme quasi-SuperHyperNotions lead us to take the collection of all the Extreme 1009
quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Searchs for all Extreme numbers less than its Extreme corresponded 1010
maximum number. The essence of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ends up but this 1011
essence starts up in the terms of the Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, again and 1012
more in the operations of collecting all the Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Searchs acted 1013
on the all possible used formations of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph to achieve one 1014
Extreme number. This Extreme number is 1015
considered as the equivalence class for all corresponded quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Searchs. 1016
Let zExtreme Number , SExtreme SuperHyperSet and GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search be an 1017
Extreme number, an Extreme SuperHyperSet and an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1018
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class = {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |

SExtreme SuperHyperSet = GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ,
|SExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number }.
As its consequences, the formal definition of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is 1019
re-formalized and redefined as follows. 1020
GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zExtreme Number

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number
{SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number }.
To get more precise perceptions, the follow-up expressions propose another formal 1021
technical definition for the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search. 1022
GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search =

{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {SExtreme SuperHyperSet |
= zExtreme Number |
= max zExtreme Number }.
[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class
In more concise and more convenient ways, the modified definition for the Extreme 1023
SuperHyperPerfect Search poses the upcoming expressions. 1024

{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
To translate the statement to this mathematical literature, the formulae will be revised. 1025

= max zExtreme Number
[zExtreme
Number ]Extreme Class

= max |E| | E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
And then, 1026


To get more visions in the closer look-up, there’s an overall overlook. 1027
GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


1028

{S ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1029


1030


Now, the extension of these types of approaches is up. Since the new term, “Extreme 1031
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, could be redefined as the collection of the Extreme 1032
SuperHyperVertices such that any amount of its Extreme SuperHyperVertices are 1033
incident to an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. It’s, literarily, another name for “Extreme 1034
Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search” but, precisely, it’s the generalization of “Extreme 1035
Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search” since “Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search” happens “Extreme 1036
SuperHyperPerfect Search” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1037
background but “Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhood” may not happens “Extreme 1038
SuperHyperPerfect Search” in an Extreme SuperHyperGraph as initial framework and 1039
preliminarily background since there are some ambiguities about the Extreme 1040
SuperHyperCardinality arise from it. To get orderly keywords, the terms, “Extreme 1041
SuperHyperNeighborhood”, “Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect Search”, and “Extreme 1042
SuperHyperPerfect Search” are up. 1043
Thus, let 1044
zExtreme Number , NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood and 1045
GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search be an Extreme number, an Extreme 1046
SuperHyperNeighborhood and an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search and the new terms are up. 1047
GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zExtreme Number

[zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
∪zExtreme Number {NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |
|NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood |Extreme Cardinality
1048

{NExtreme SuperHyperNeighborhood
∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
|NExtreme SuperHyperSet |Extreme Cardinality
= zExtreme Number |
1049

∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class |
1050

And with go back to initial structure, 1051
GExtreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =


1052

∈ ∪zExtreme Number [zExtreme Number ]Extreme Class =
= zExtreme Number |

1053


1054


Thus, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The all interior 1055
Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect Search if for 1056
any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, some interior 1057
Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors with no 1058
Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any amount of 1059
them. 1060
To make sense with the precise words in the terms of “R-’, the follow-up illustrations 1061
are coming up. 1062
The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices is the simple

Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search.
The Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,

Is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. The

Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1063
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1064
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 1065
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge amid 1066
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by 1067
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is related to the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the

Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
There’s not only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex inside the intended Extreme
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is up. The obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is an
Extreme SuperHyperSet includes only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex. But the
Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
doesn’t have less than two SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme
SuperHyperSet since they’ve come from at least so far an SuperHyperEdge. Thus the
non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search
is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect

. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices,
Search
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {xy}
or
(V \ V \ {x, z}) ∪ {zy}
is an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1068
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1069
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1070
instead of all given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme 1071
SuperHyperPerfect Search and it’s an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it’s 1072
the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of

Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for
some amount Extreme SuperHyperVertices instead of all given by that Extreme
type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search. There isn’t only less than
two Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet,
Thus the non-obvious Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search,
is up. The non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme

SuperHyperPerfect Search, not:
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not:
does includes only less than two SuperHyperVertices in a connected Extreme 1073
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) but it’s impossible in the case, they’ve corresponded 1074
to an SuperHyperEdge. It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious simple 1075
Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1076
“Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search” 1077
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1078
Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, 1079
is only and only
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E) with a illustrated

SuperHyperModeling. It’s also, not only an Extreme free-triangle embedded
SuperHyperModel and an Extreme on-triangle embedded SuperHyperModel but also
it’s an Extreme stable embedded SuperHyperModel. But all only non-obvious simple
Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search amid those obvious
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search, are
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1080
To sum them up, assume a connected loopless Extreme SuperHyperGraph

ESHG : (V, E). Then in the worst case, literally,
is an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. In other words, the least cardinality, the lower
sharp bound for the cardinality, of an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search is the cardinality of
To sum them up, in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The 1081
all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices belong to any Extreme quasi-R-SuperHyperPerfect 1082
Search if for any of them, and any of other corresponded Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 1083
some interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices are mutually Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors 1084
with no Extreme exception at all minus all Extreme SuperHypeNeighbors to any 1085
amount of them. 1086
Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Let an Extreme 1087
SuperHyperEdge ESHE : E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) has some Extreme SuperHyperVertices r. 1088
Consider all Extreme numbers of those Extreme SuperHyperVertices from that Extreme 1089
SuperHyperEdge excluding excluding more than r distinct Extreme 1090
SuperHyperVertices, exclude to any given Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1091
SuperHyperVertices. Consider there’s an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search with the least 1092
cardinality, the lower sharp Extreme bound for Extreme cardinality. Assume a 1093
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1094
the Extreme SuperHyperVertices VESHE \ {z} is an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of the 1095
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1096
some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely but it isn’t an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect 1097
Search. Since it doesn’t have 1098
Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have 1100
some SuperHyperVertices uniquely. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme 1101
SuperHyperVertices VESHE ∪ {z} is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 1102
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices but it isn’t an Extreme 1103
R-SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it doesn’t do the Extreme procedure such that such that 1104
there’s an Extreme SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1105
uniquely [there are at least one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside implying there’s, 1106
sometimes in the connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E), an Extreme 1107
SuperHyperVertex, titled its Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, to that Extreme 1108
SuperHyperVertex in the Extreme SuperHyperSet S so as S doesn’t do “the Extreme 1109
procedure”.]. There’s only one Extreme SuperHyperVertex outside the intended 1110
Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE ∪ {z}, in the terms of Extreme 1111
SuperHyperNeighborhood. Thus the obvious Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect Search, VESHE is 1112
up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect 1113
Search, VESHE , is an Extreme SuperHyperSet, VESHE , includes only all Extreme 1114
SuperHyperVertices does forms any kind of Extreme pairs are titled 1115
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1116
ESHG : (V, E). Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1117
VESHE , is the maximum Extreme SuperHyperCardinality of an Extreme 1118
SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such that there’s an Extreme 1119
SuperHyperEdge to have some Extreme SuperHyperVertices uniquely. Thus, in a 1120
connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). Any Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect 1121
Search only contains all interior Extreme SuperHyperVertices and all exterior Extreme 1122
SuperHyperVertices from the unique Extreme SuperHyperEdge where there’s any of 1123
them has all possible Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors in and there’s all Extreme 1124
SuperHyperNeighborhoods in with no exception minus all Extreme 1125
SuperHypeNeighbors to some of them not all of them but everything is possible about 1126
Extreme SuperHyperNeighborhoods and Extreme SuperHyperNeighbors out. 1127
The SuperHyperNotion, namely, SuperHyperPerfect Search, is up. There’s neither empty 1128
SuperHyperEdge nor loop SuperHyperEdge. The following Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1129
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] is the simple Extreme 1130
type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search. The Extreme SuperHyperSet of 1131
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1132

|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeQuasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial
= 2z b 2 c
.
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearch = {Vi }si=1 , {Vj }tj=1 .
C(N SHG)ExtremeR−Quasi−SuperHyperP erf ectSearchSuperHyperP olynomial
= az s + bz t .
is the simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search . The 1133
Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1134

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1135
ESHG : (V, E) is an Extreme type-SuperHyperSet with 1136
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1138
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1139
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There are not only two Extreme 1140
SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet. Thus the 1141
non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is up. The obvious simple Extreme 1142
type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is an Extreme 1143
SuperHyperSet includes only two Extreme SuperHyperVertices. But the Extreme 1144
SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1145

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 Extreme 1146
SuperHyperSet. Thus the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the 1147
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search is up. To sum them up, the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the 1148
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1149

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the non-obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect 1150
. Since the Extreme SuperHyperSet of the Extreme

Search 1151
SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices], 1152

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search C(ESHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1153
ESHG : (V, E) is the Extreme SuperHyperSet S of Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1154
that there’s no an Extreme SuperHyperEdge for some Extreme SuperHyperVertices 1155
given by that Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search and 1156
it’s an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search. Since it’s 1157
Extreme SuperHyperEdges[SuperHyperVertices] such that there’s no Extreme 1159
SuperHyperVertex of an Extreme SuperHyperEdge is common and there’s an Extreme 1160
SuperHyperEdge for all Extreme SuperHyperVertices. There aren’t only less than three 1161
Extreme SuperHyperVertices inside the intended Extreme SuperHyperSet, 1162

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Thus the non-obvious Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search , 1163

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is up. The obvious simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet of the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect 1164
Search , not: 1165

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
Is the Extreme SuperHyperSet, not: 1166

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 Extreme 1167
SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). It’s interesting to mention that the only non-obvious 1168
simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSet called the 1169
“Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search ” 1170
amid those obvious[non-obvious] simple Extreme type-SuperHyperSets called the 1171
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect Search , 1172
is only and only 1173

b c
= {E2i−1 }i=1 2
.
= 2z b 2 c
.
= az s + bz t .
In a connected Extreme SuperHyperGraph ESHG : (V, E). 1174
5 The Extreme Departures on The Theoretical 1175
Results Toward Theoretical Motivations 1176
The previous Extreme approach apply on the upcoming Extreme results on Extreme 1177
SuperHyperClasses. 1178
Proposition 5.1. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). Then 1179

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1180
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1181
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 Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1182
There’s a new way to redefine as 1183
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 1184
corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. The 1185
latter is straightforward. 1186
Example 5.2. In the Figure (23), the connected Extreme SuperHyperPath 1187
ESHP : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The Extreme SuperHyperSet, in the 1188
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1189
Proposition 5.3. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1190
Figure 23. an Extreme SuperHyperPath Associated to the Notions of Extreme Super-

HyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Example (16.5)
Then 1191

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1192
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V |EN SHG |
, E |EN SHG |
3 3
1193
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E |EN SHG | , V |EN SHG |
3 3
Figure 24. an Extreme SuperHyperCycle Associated to the Extreme Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Extreme Example (16.7)
be a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle ESHC : (V, E). 1194

Example 5.4. In the Figure (24), the connected Extreme SuperHyperCycle 1199
N SHC : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, in 1200
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1201
Proposition 5.5. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). Then 1202

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

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Extreme Example (16.9)
Proof. Let 1203
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
CEN T ER, E2
1204
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , CEN T ER
be a longest path taken a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). There’s 1205
a new way to redefine as 1206

Example 5.6. In the Figure (25), the connected Extreme SuperHyperStar 1210
ESHS : (V, E), is highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by 1211
the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the 1212
connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel 1213
(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1214
Proposition 5.7. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1215
Then 1216

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1217
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1218
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). 1219

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1223
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1224
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search could be applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. 1225
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1226
the 1227
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search taken from a connected Extreme 1228
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1229
Figure 26. Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Example (16.11)
minimum-Extreme-of-SuperHyperPart SuperHyperEdges are attained in any solution 1230
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
The latter is straightforward. 1231
Example 5.8. In the Extreme Figure (26), the connected Extreme 1232
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1233
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous Extreme 1234
result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1235
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (26), is the 1236
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1237
Proposition 5.9. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1238
ESHM : (V, E). Then 1239

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1240
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
V|P i |=minP ∈E |Pj | , E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | .
j N SHG
1241
P :
E1 , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2 , V2EXT ERN AL ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
E|Pi |=minPj ∈EN SHG |Pj | , V|Pi |=minP ∈E |Pj |
j N SHG
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1243

latter is straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1246
Thus the notion of quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on 1247
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search could be applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. 1248
Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in 1249
the 1250
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest path taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1251
ESHM : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1252
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
ESHM : (V, E). The latter is straightforward. 1255
Example 5.10. In the Figure (27), the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 1256
ESHM : (V, E), is highlighted and Extreme featured. The obtained Extreme 1257
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous Extreme result, of the Extreme 1258
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), 1259
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1260
Figure 27. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Example (16.13)
Proposition 5.11. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1261
ESHW : (V, E ∪ E ∗ ). Then, 1262

{Ei , Ej }.
X
= za.
{VEi }.
X
= za.
Proof. Let 1263
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1∗ ,
CEN T ER, E2∗
1264
P :
E1∗ , V1EXT ERN AL ,
E2∗ , CEN T ER
SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1266

Figure 28. an Extreme SuperHyperWheel Extreme Associated to the Extreme Notions

of Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in the Extreme Example (16.15)
latter is straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Thus 1269
the notion of quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on 1270
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search could be applied. The unique embedded 1271
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search proposes some longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 1272
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1273
Example 5.12. In the Extreme Figure (28), the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1274
N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained Extreme 1275
SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1276
SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E), in 1277
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1278
6 The Surveys of Mathematical Sets On The 1279
Results But As The Initial Motivation 1280
For the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, and the 1281
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, some general results are introduced. 1282
Remark 6.1. Let remind that the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is “redefined” 1283
on the positions of the alphabets. 1284
Corollary 6.2. Assume Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1285
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearch =

{theSuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearchof theSuperHyperV ertices |
max |SuperHyperOf f ensive
SuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearch
|ExtremecardinalityamidthoseSuperHyperSuperHyperP erf ectSearch. }
plus one Extreme SuperHypeNeighbor to one. Where σi is the unary operation on the 1286
SuperHyperVertices of the SuperHyperGraph to assign the determinacy, the 1287
indeterminacy and the neutrality, for i = 1, 2, 3, respectively. 1288
Corollary 6.3. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the same identical letter of 1289
the alphabet. Then the notion of Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and 1290
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search coincide. 1291
the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is an Extreme 1293
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if and only if it’s a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1294
the alphabet. Then a consecutive sequence of the SuperHyperVertices is a strongest 1296
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search if and only if it’s a longest SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1297
Corollary 6.6. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph on the 1298
same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is its 1299
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and reversely. 1300
Corollary 6.7. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, 1301
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel) on 1302
the same identical letter of the alphabet. Then its Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is 1303
its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and reversely. 1304
Corollary 6.8. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1305
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1306
Search isn’t well-defined. 1307
Corollary 6.9. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its 1308
Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1309
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined. 1310
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1312
Then its Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined if and only if its 1313
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search isn’t well-defined. 1314
Corollary 6.11. Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then its Extreme 1315
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined if and only if its SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 1316
is well-defined. 1317
Corollary 6.12. Assume SuperHyperClasses of an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1318
its Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined if and only if its 1319
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined. 1320
SuperHyperStar, SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). 1322
Then its Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined if and only if its 1323
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search is well-defined. 1324
Proposition 6.14. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then V is 1325
(i) : the dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1326
(ii) : the strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1327
(iii) : the connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1328
(iv) : the δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1329
(v) : the strong δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1330
(vi) : the connected δ-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1331
Proposition 6.15. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then ∅ is 1332
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1333
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1334
(iii) : the connected defensive SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1335
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1336
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1337
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1338
Proposition 6.16. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then an 1339
independent SuperHyperSet is 1340
(i) : the SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1341
(ii) : the strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1342
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1343
(iv) : the δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1344
(v) : the strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1345
(vi) : the connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1346
Proposition 6.17. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperUniform 1347
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search/SuperHyperPath. Then V is a 1348
maximal 1349
(i) : SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1350
(ii) : strong SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1351
(iii) : connected SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1352
(iv) : O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1353
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1354
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1355
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1356
Proposition 6.18. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1357
SuperHyperUniform SuperHyperWheel. Then V is a maximal 1358
(i) : dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1359
(ii) : strong dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1360
(iii) : connected dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1361
(iv) : O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1362
(v) : strong O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1363
(vi) : connected O(ESHG)-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1364
Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1365
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search/SuperHyperPath. Then the 1367
number of 1368
(i) : the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1369
(ii) : the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1370
(iii) : the connected SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1371
(iv) : the O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1372
(v) : the strong O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1373
(vi) : the connected O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1374
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1375
SuperHyperVertices coincide. 1376
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperWheel. Then the number of 1378
(i) : the dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1379
(ii) : the dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1380
(iii) : the dual connected SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1381
(iv) : the dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1382
(v) : the strong dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1383
(vi) : the connected dual O(ESHG)-SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1384
is one and it’s only V. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1385
SuperHyperGraph which is a SuperHyperStar/SuperHyperComplete 1388
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1389
SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of multiplying r with the 1390
number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices is a 1391
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1395
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1396
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1397
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then a 1400
SuperHyperSet contains the half of multiplying r with the number of all the 1401
SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the SuperHyperVertices in the biggest SuperHyperPart 1402
is a 1403
(iv) : δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1407
(v) : strong δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1408
(vi) : connected δ-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1409
SuperHyperBipartite/SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperMultipartite. Then Then the 1412
number of 1413
O(ESHG)
(iv) : 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1417
O(ESHG)
(v) : strong 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1418
O(ESHG)
(vi) : connected 2 + 1-dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1419
is one and it’s only S, a SuperHyperSet contains [the SuperHyperCenter and] the half of 1420
multiplying r with the number of all the SuperHyperEdges plus one of all the 1421
SuperHyperVertices. Where the exterior SuperHyperVertices and the interior 1422
Proposition 6.24. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. The number 1424
of connected component is |V − S| if there’s a SuperHyperSet which is a dual 1425
(iv) : SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1429
(v) : strong 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1430
(vi) : connected 1-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1431
Proposition 6.25. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then the 1432
number is at most O(ESHG) and the Extreme number is at most On (ESHG). 1433
Proposition 6.26. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1434
SuperHyperComplete. The number is O(ESHG:(V,E)) 2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1435
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of dual 1436
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1440
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1442
Proposition 6.27. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is ∅. 1443
The number is 0 and the Extreme number is 0, for an independent SuperHyperSet in the 1444
setting of dual 1445
(iv) : 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1449
(v) : strong 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1450
(vi) : connected 0-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1451
SuperHyperComplete. Then there’s no independent SuperHyperSet. 1453
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search/SuperHyperPath/SuperHyperWheel. The number is 1455
O(ESHG : (V, E)) and the Extreme number is On (ESHG : (V, E)), in the setting of a 1456
dual 1457
(iv) : O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1461
(v) : strong O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1462
(vi) : connected O(ESHG : (V, E))-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1463
SuperHyperStar/complete SuperHyperBipartite/complete SuperHyperMultiPartite. The 1465
number is O(ESHG:(V,E))
2 + 1 and the Extreme number is 1466
min Σv∈{v1 ,v2 ,··· ,vt } O(ESHG:(V,E)) ⊆V σ(v), in the setting of a dual 1467
t>
2
(iv) : ( O(ESHG:(V,E))
(v) : strong ( O(ESHG:(V,E))

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

2 + 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1473
Proposition 6.31. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a SuperHyperFamily of the ESHGs : (V, E) 1474
Extreme SuperHyperGraphs which are from one-type SuperHyperClass which the result is 1475
obtained for the individuals. Then the results also hold for the SuperHyperFamily 1476
N SHF : (V, E) of these specific SuperHyperClasses of the Extreme SuperHyperGraphs. 1477
Proposition 6.32. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1478
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then ∀v ∈ V \ S, ∃x ∈ S such 1479
that 1480
(i) v ∈ Ns (x); 1481
(ii) vx ∈ E. 1482
Proposition 6.33. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. If S is 1483
a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then 1484
(i) S is SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search set; 1485
(ii) there’s S ⊆ S 0 such that |S 0 | is SuperHyperChromatic number. 1486
Proposition 6.34. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then 1487
(i) Γ ≤ O; 1488
(ii) Γs ≤ On . 1489
Proposition 6.35. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a strong Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1490
connected. Then 1491
(i) Γ ≤ O − 1; 1492
(ii) Γs ≤ On − Σ3i=1 σi (x). 1493
Proposition 6.36. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperPath. Then 1494
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1495
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1497
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1498
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1499
a dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1500
Proposition 6.37. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperPath. Then 1501
(i) the set S = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1502
Search; 1503
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and 1504
{v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 }; 1505
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1506
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1507
dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1508
Proposition 6.38. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1509
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1510
(ii) Γ = b n2 c and corresponded SuperHyperSets are {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and 1512
{v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1513
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· ,vn } σ(s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· ,vn−1 } σ(s)}; 1514
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · , vn−1 } are only 1515
Proposition 6.39. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then 1517
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1518
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 and corresponded SuperHyperSet is S = {v2 , v4 , · · · , vn−1 }; 1520
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S={v2 ,v4 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s), Σs∈S={v1 ,v3 ,··· .vn−1 } Σ3i=1 σi (s)}; 1521
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S1 = {v2 , v4 , · · · .vn−1 } and S2 = {v1 , v3 , · · · .vn−1 } are only 1522
Proposition 6.40. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperStar. Then 1524
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c} is a dual maximal SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1525
(ii) Γ = 1; 1526
(iii) Γs = Σ3i=1 σi (c); 1527
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c} and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1528
Proposition 6.41. Let ESHG : (V, E) be SuperHyperWheel. Then 1529
6+3(i−1)≤n
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is a dual 1530
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1531
6+3(i−1)≤n
(ii) Γ = |{v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 |; 1532
(iii) Γs = Σ{v1 ,v3 }∪{v6 ,v9 ··· ,vi+6 ,··· ,vn }6+3(i−1)≤n Σ3i=1 σi (s); 1533
i=1
6+3(i−1)≤n
(iv) the SuperHyperSet {v1 , v3 } ∪ {v6 , v9 · · · , vi+6 , · · · , vn }i=1 is only a dual 1534
maximal SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1535
Proposition 6.42. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an odd SuperHyperComplete. Then 1536
b n c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1537
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1; 1539
(iii) Γs = min{Σs∈S Σ3i=1 σi (s)} 2

b n c+1 ; 1540
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1541
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1542
Proposition 6.43. Let ESHG : (V, E) be an even SuperHyperComplete. Then 1543
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1544
(ii) Γ = b n2 c; 1546

bnc ; 1547
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 2
is only a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1548
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1549
Proposition 6.44. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of Extreme 1550
SuperHyperStars with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex SuperHyperSet. Then 1551
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1552
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF; 1553
(ii) Γ = m for N SHF : (V, E); 1554
(iii) Γs = Σm 3
i=1 Σj=1 σj (ci ) for N SHF : (V, E); 1555
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {c1 , c2 , · · · , cm } and S ⊂ S 0 are only dual 1556
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF : (V, E). 1557
Proposition 6.45. Let N SHF : (V, E) be an m-SuperHyperFamily of odd 1558
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1559
SuperHyperSet. Then 1560
bn
2 c+1
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual maximal SuperHyperDefensive 1561
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF; 1562
(ii) Γ = b n2 c + 1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1563

b n c+1 for N SHF : (V, E); 1564
S={vi }i=1
b n c+1
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1 2
are only a dual maximal 1565
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF : (V, E). 1566
Proposition 6.46. Let N SHF : (V, E) be a m-SuperHyperFamily of even 1567
SuperHyperComplete SuperHyperGraphs with common Extreme SuperHyperVertex 1568
SuperHyperSet. Then 1569
bn
2c
(i) the SuperHyperSet S = {vi }i=1 is a dual SuperHyperDefensive 1570
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search for N SHF : (V, E); 1571
(ii) Γ = b n2 c for N SHF : (V, E); 1572

bnc for N SHF : (V, E); 1573
S={vi }i=1
bnc
(iv) the SuperHyperSets S = {vi }i=1
2
are only dual maximal SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1574
Search for N SHF : (V, E). 1575
following statements hold; 1577
(i) if s ≥ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1578
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is an 1579
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1580
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1581
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is a dual 1582
s-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1583
following statements hold; 1585
(i) if s ≥ t + 2 and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is an 1586
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is an 1587
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1588
(ii) if s ≤ t and a SuperHyperSet S of SuperHyperVertices is a dual 1589
t-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, then S is a dual 1590
s-SuperHyperPowerful SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1591
Proposition 6.49. Let ESHG : (V, E) be a[an] 1592
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1593
hold; 1594
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1595
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1596
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1597
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1599
(iv) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1601
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1602
Proposition 6.50. Let ESHG : (V, E) is a[an] 1603
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph. Then following statements 1604
hold; 1605
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1606
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b 2r c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1608
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an V-SuperHyperDefensive 1610
(iv) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1612
V-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1613
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1615
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1616
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1 2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1617
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1619
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an (O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive 1621
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1624
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is a 1626
SuperHyperComplete. Then following statements hold; 1627
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 1628
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > b O−1

2 c + 1, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1630
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is 1632
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search; 1633
(O − 1)-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1635
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1637
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then following statements hold; 1638
(i) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2 if ESHG : (V, E)) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1639
(ii) ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2 if ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1641
(iii) ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0 if ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1643
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1646
[V-]SuperHyperUniform-strong-Extreme SuperHyperGraph which is 1648
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. Then following statements hold; 1649
(i) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| < 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1650
(ii) if ∀a ∈ V \ S, |Ns (a) ∩ S| > 2, then ESHG : (V, E) is a dual 1652
(iii) if ∀a ∈ S, |Ns (a) ∩ V \ S| = 0, then ESHG : (V, E) is an 2-SuperHyperDefensive 1654
2-SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1657
7 Extreme Applications in Cancer’s Extreme 1658
Recognition 1659
The cancer is the Extreme disease but the Extreme model is going to figure out what’s 1660
going on this Extreme phenomenon. The special Extreme case of this Extreme disease 1661
is considered and as the consequences of the model, some parameters are used. The cells 1662
are under attack of this disease but the moves of the cancer in the special region are the 1663
matter of mind. The Extreme recognition of the cancer could help to find some 1664
Extreme treatments for this Extreme disease. 1665
In the following, some Extreme steps are Extreme devised on this disease. 1666
Figure 29. an Extreme SuperHyperBipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search
Step 1. (Extreme Definition) The Extreme recognition of the cancer in the 1667
long-term Extreme function. 1668
Step 2. (Extreme Issue) The specific region has been assigned by the Extreme 1669
model [it’s called Extreme SuperHyperGraph] and the long Extreme cycle of the 1670
move from the cancer is identified by this research. Sometimes the move of the 1671
cancer hasn’t be easily identified since there are some determinacy, indeterminacy 1672
and neutrality about the moves and the effects of the cancer on that region; this 1673
event leads us to choose another model [it’s said to be Extreme SuperHyperGraph] 1674
to have convenient perception on what’s happened and what’s done. 1675
Step 3. (Extreme Model) There are some specific Extreme models, which are 1676
well-known and they’ve got the names, and some general Extreme models. The 1677
moves and the Extreme traces of the cancer on the complex tracks and between 1678
complicated groups of cells could be fantasized by an Extreme 1679
SuperHyperPath(-/SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, SuperHyperStar, 1680
SuperHyperBipartite, SuperHyperMultipartite, SuperHyperWheel). The aim is to 1681
find either the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search or the Extreme 1682
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search in those Extreme Extreme SuperHyperModels. 1683
8 Case 1: The Initial Extreme Steps Toward 1684
Extreme SuperHyperBipartite as Extreme 1685
SuperHyperModel 1686
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (29), the Extreme 1687
SuperHyperBipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1688
By using the Extreme Figure (29) and the Table (4), the Extreme 1689
SuperHyperBipartite is obtained. 1690
Table 4. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperBipartite
Figure 30. an Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite Associated to the Notions of Extreme

SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1691
Extreme result, of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of the connected Extreme 1692
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (29), is 1693
the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1694
9 Case 2: The Increasing Extreme Steps Toward 1695
Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite as Extreme 1696
SuperHyperModel 1697
Step 4. (Extreme Solution) In the Extreme Figure (30), the Extreme 1698
SuperHyperMultipartite is Extreme highlighted and Extreme featured. 1699
By using the Extreme Figure (30) and the Table (5), the Extreme 1700
SuperHyperMultipartite is obtained. 1701
The obtained Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Extreme Algorithm in previous 1702
SuperHyperMultipartite ESHM : (V, E), in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (30), 1704
is the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. 1705
Table 5. The Values of Vertices, SuperVertices, Edges, HyperEdges, and SuperHyper-

Edges Belong to The Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite
10 Wondering Open Problems But As The 1706
Directions To Forming The Motivations 1707
In what follows, some “problems” and some “questions” are proposed. 1708
The SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 1709
are defined on a real-world application, titled “Cancer’s Recognitions”. 1710
Question 10.1. Which the else SuperHyperModels could be defined based on Cancer’s 1711
recognitions? 1712
Question 10.2. Are there some SuperHyperNotions related to SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect 1713
and the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search?

Search 1714
Question 10.3. Are there some Algorithms to be defined on the SuperHyperModels to 1715
compute them? 1716
Question 10.4. Which the SuperHyperNotions are related to beyond the 1717
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search? 1718
Problem 10.5. The SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Extreme 1719
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search do a SuperHyperModel for the Cancer’s recognitions and 1720
they’re based on SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, are there else? 1721
Problem 10.6. Which the fundamental SuperHyperNumbers are related to these 1722
SuperHyperNumbers types-results? 1723
Problem 10.7. What’s the independent research based on Cancer’s recognitions 1724
concerning the multiple types of SuperHyperNotions? 1725
11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks 1726
In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The drawbacks 1727
of this research are illustrated. Some benefits and some advantages of this research are 1728
highlighted. 1729
This research uses some approaches to make Extreme SuperHyperGraphs more 1730
understandable. In this endeavor, two SuperHyperNotions are defined on the 1731
SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. For that sake in the second definition, the main 1732
definition of the Extreme SuperHyperGraph is redefined on the position of the 1733
alphabets. Based on the new definition for the Extreme SuperHyperGraph, the new 1734
SuperHyperNotion, Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, finds the convenient 1735
background to implement some results based on that. Some SuperHyperClasses and 1736
some Extreme SuperHyperClasses are the cases of this research on the modeling of the 1737
regions where are under the attacks of the cancer to recognize this disease as it’s 1738
mentioned on the title “Cancer’s Recognitions”. To formalize the instances on the 1739
SuperHyperNotion, SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search, the new SuperHyperClasses and 1740
SuperHyperClasses, are introduced. Some general results are gathered in the section on 1741
the SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search and the Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search. The 1742
clarifications, instances and literature reviews have taken the whole way through. In 1743
this research, the literature reviews have fulfilled the lines containing the notions and 1744
the results. The SuperHyperGraph and Extreme SuperHyperGraph are the 1745
SuperHyperModels on the “Cancer’s Recognitions” and both bases are the background 1746
of this research. Sometimes the cancer has been happened on the region, full of cells, 1747
groups of cells and embedded styles. In this segment, the SuperHyperModel proposes 1748
some SuperHyperNotions based on the connectivities of the moves of the cancer in the 1749
longest and strongest styles with the formation of the design and the architecture are 1750
formally called “ SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search” in the themes of jargons and 1751
buzzwords. The prefix “SuperHyper” refers to the theme of the embedded styles to 1752
figure out the background for the SuperHyperNotions. In the Table (6), benefits and
Table 6. An Overlook On This Research And Beyond

Advantages Limitations
1. Redefining Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1. General Results
2. SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search
3. Extreme SuperHyperSuperHyperPerfect Search 2. Other SuperHyperNumbers
4. Modeling of Cancer’s Recognitions
5. SuperHyperClasses 3. SuperHyperFamilies
1753
avenues for this research are, figured out, pointed out and spoken out. 1754
12 Extreme SuperHyperDuality But As The 1755
Forms 1757
Definition 12.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperDuality). 1758
Assume an Extreme SuperHyperGraph (NSHG) S is a pair S = (V, E). Consider an 1759
Extreme SuperHyperSet V 0 = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs } and E 0 = {E1 , E2 , . . . , Ez }. Then either 1760
V 0 or E 0 is called 1761
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1762
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 1763
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Ei ∈ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 such 1764
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej and |Ei |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Ej |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 1765
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1766
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 1767
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality if ∀Vi ∈ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 such 1768
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea and |Vi |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Vj |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 1769
(v) Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1770
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1771
rv-SuperHyperDuality. 1772
Definition 12.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperDuality). 1773
Extreme SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) E = {V1 , V2 , . . . , Vs }. Then E is called 1775
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1776
e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1777
v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for an 1778
Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality 1779
of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1780
SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 1781
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1783
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, 1784
Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme v-SuperHyperDuality, and Extreme 1785
rv-SuperHyperDuality and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 1786
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of the Extreme 1787
SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 1788
consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme SuperHyperVertices such 1789
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1790
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1791
Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1792
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 1799
Extreme coefficient; 1800
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1801
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1811
Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1818
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality if it’s either of Extreme 1819
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 1823
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperDuality; 1825
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 1826
of Extreme e-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme re-SuperHyperDuality, Extreme 1827
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 1836
Extreme coefficient. 1845
SuperHyperDuality, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 1849
E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 1850
SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of 1851
Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, 1852
E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 1853
Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme 1854
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1855
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E4 is an Extreme 1858
SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s 1859
only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, 1860
V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as 1861
an Extreme endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in 1862
every given Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1863


C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial 6z 8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V3i+17i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E15 , E16 , E17 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V3 , V13 , V8 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial =
4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+13i=0 , E23 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V3i+13i=0 , V15 }.

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme SuperHyperDuality = {E3i+1i=03 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality = {V2i+1i=05 }.



C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 9 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 9 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Proposition 12.4. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperPath ESHP : (V, E). 1906
Then 1907
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 3

.
Y |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z 3 .
Proof. Let 1908
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
E |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality .
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperDuality. The latter is 1912
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperDuality. 1916
Then 1918
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperDuality

.
Proof. Let 1919
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1927
Proposition 12.8. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperStar ESHS : (V, E). 1928
Then 1929
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1930
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, VjEXT ERN AL .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1940
Proposition 12.10. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1941
ESHB : (V, E). Then 1942
C(N SHG)Extreme 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) |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1943
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 1948
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperDuality could be applied. 1949
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1950
SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 1951
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 1952
ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 1953
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1961

= {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 |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 1964
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme 1965

There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 1971
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1982
Proposition 12.14. Assume a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel ESHW : (V, E). 1983
Then, 1984
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {E ∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)

∗
}.
= |i | Ei∗ ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|
∗
Extreme Cardinality
|z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperDuality SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 1985
P :
...,
∗ EXT ERN AL
E|E ∗ | , V|E ∗ |Extreme Cardinality +1
ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality ESHG:(V,E)
is a longest SuperHyperDuality taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 1986
ESHW : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 1987

∃!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 1992
excerpt from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 1993
SuperHyperWheel N SHW : (V, E), is Extreme highlighted and featured. The obtained 1995
Extreme SuperHyperSet, by the Algorithm in previous result, of the Extreme 1996
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperDuality. 1998
13 Extreme SuperHyperJoin But As The 1999
Forms 2001
Definition 13.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperJoin). 2002
0 0
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E , ∃Ej ∈ E , such that 2006
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2007
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2008
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2009
|Ei |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Ej |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2010
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2011
Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2012
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2013
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2014
|Vi |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Vj |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2015
(v) Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2016
re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin. 2017
Definition 13.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperJoin). 2018
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2021
Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme 2022
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2023
N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme cardinality of an Extreme 2024
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges in 2025
the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2026
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2027
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2028
rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2030
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2034
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2035
Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme re-SuperHyperJoin, Extreme 2036
v-SuperHyperJoin, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperJoin and C(N SHG) for an 2037
Extreme SuperHyperJoin; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2043
coefficient; 2044
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2045
coefficient; 2054
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2055
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2059
in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2060
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2061
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperJoin, 2062
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2066
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperJoin; 2068
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2069
coefficient; 2078
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2079
coefficient. 2088
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. E1 2092
and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is a loop Extreme 2093
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2098
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V2 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
SuperHyperJoin, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2100
every given Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2106


C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V5 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial 6z 8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V3i+17i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E15 , E16 , E17 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial =
4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+13i=0 , E23 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V3i+13i=0 , V15 }.

4 × 5 × 5z 3 .

3 × 3z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V1 , Vii610=5,7,8 }.
i=4

3 × 3z 2 .



(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin = {E3i+1i=03 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin = {V2i+1i=05 }.


C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = 10z.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2150
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperJoin

.
Proof. Let 2151
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperJoin. The latter is 2155
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperJoin. 2159
Then 2161

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

.
Proof. Let 2162
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2170
Then 2172
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperJoin SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2173

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2183
C(N SHG)Extreme 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 |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2186
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 2191
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2192
There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2193
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2195
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2204

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 |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2207
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2208
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2209

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2212
may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. 2213
There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have one 2214
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2225
Then, 2227

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

.
Proof. Let 2228
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3
is a longest SuperHyperJoin taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2229

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperJoin. Thus the notion of quasi 2233
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperJoin could be applied. The 2234
unique embedded SuperHyperJoin proposes some longest SuperHyperJoin excerpt from 2235
some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2236
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperJoin. 2241
14 Extreme SuperHyperPerfect But As The 2242
Forms 2244
Definition 14.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperPerfect). 2245
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2249
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2250
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such 2251
that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and |Ei |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Ej |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2252
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2253
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2254
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such 2255
that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and |Vi |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Vj |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2256
(v) Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2257
Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme 2258
rv-SuperHyperPerfect. 2259
Definition 14.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperPerfect). 2260
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2263
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2265
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2269
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, 2270
rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2272
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2276
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2277
Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2278
v-SuperHyperPerfect, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperPerfect and C(N SHG) for an 2279
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2285
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2287
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2297
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2298
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2304
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect if it’s either of Extreme 2305
e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2306
of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high 2309
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect; 2311
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2312
of Extreme e-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme re-SuperHyperPerfect, Extreme 2313
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2322
SuperHyperPerfect, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2335
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2341
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
every given Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2349


C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E3i+13i=0 , E3i+243i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial 6z 8 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3i+17i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E15 , E16 , E17 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 , V8 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial =
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {E3i+13i=0 , E23 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 5 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3i+13i=0 , V15 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 5 .

3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

3 × 2z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {V1 , Vii610=5,7,8 }.
i=4

3 × 3z 2 .



C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V2 , V7 , V17 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial =
(1 × 5 × 5) + (1 × 2 + 1)z 3 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V27 , V2 , V7 , V17 }.
(1 × 1 × 2 + 1)z 4 .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E3i+1i=03 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V2i+1i=05 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 6 .



C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect = {V3 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 10 × 6 + 10 × 6 + 12 × 6 + 12 × 6z 2 .
Then 2393
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2394
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperPerfect. The latter is 2398
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperPerfect. 2402
Then 2404
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect =

= {Ei }i=1 3
.
= 3z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect

.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial
Proof. Let 2405
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
3 3

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2413
Then 2415
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2416

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2426
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2429
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 2434
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2435
applied. There are only two SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2436
one SuperHyperVertex as the representative in the 2437
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2438
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2447

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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperPerfect SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2450
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme 2451

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of 2455
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be 2456
applied. There are only z 0 SuperHyperParts. Thus every SuperHyperPart could have 2457
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
...,
EXT ERN AL
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2468
Then, 2470
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperPerfect = {E ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperPerfect = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2471
is a longest SuperHyperPerfect taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2472

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperPerfect. Thus the notion of quasi 2476
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperPerfect could be applied. The 2477
unique embedded SuperHyperPerfect proposes some longest SuperHyperPerfect excerpt 2478
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2479
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperPerfect. 2484
15 Extreme SuperHyperTotal But As The 2485
Forms 2487
Definition 15.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperTotal). 2488
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2492
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; 2493
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Ej ∈ E 0 , such that 2494
Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and |Ei |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Ej |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2495
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2496
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; 2497
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal if ∀Vi ∈ VESHG:(V,E) , ∃!Vj ∈ V 0 , such that 2498
Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; and |Vi |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Vj |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2499
(v) Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2500
Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme 2501
rv-SuperHyperTotal. 2502
Definition 15.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperTotal). 2503
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2506
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2508
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2512
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2513
rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph 2515
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2519
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2520
Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme re-SuperHyperTotal, Extreme 2521
v-SuperHyperTotal, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperTotal and C(N SHG) for an 2522
Extreme SuperHyperTotal; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its Extreme 2528
coefficient; 2529
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2530
coefficient; 2539
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2540
SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices 2544
in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2545
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2546
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal if it’s either of Extreme e-SuperHyperTotal, 2547
SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality 2551
that they form the Extreme SuperHyperTotal; 2553
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2554
coefficient; 2563
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2564
coefficient. 2573
SuperHyperTotal, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely straightforward. 2577
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2583
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
every given Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2591


C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi- = {E4 , E2 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 2z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei+19i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+19i=0 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme 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 R-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial =
3 × 4 × 4z 3 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial 10z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+19i=0 }.

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 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)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {Vi+2i=011 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal = {V3 , V10 , V6 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= 3 × 6z 3 .
Then 2635
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial
= z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2636
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperTotal. The latter is 2640
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperTotal. 2644
Then 2646
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal =

|E | −2
= {Ei }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal
|E | −2
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality .
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −2
Proof. Let 2647
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E |E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .
, V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1

the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2655
Then 2657
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2658
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .


(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2668
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2671
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2676
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2677
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperBipartite 2680
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2689

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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperTotal SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2692
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperMultipartite 2693
ESHM : (V, E). There’s a new way to redefine as 2694

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of 2697
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be 2698
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2710
Then, 2712
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperTotal = {Ei , Ej ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
∗
= |i(i − 1) | Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality
|z 2 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperTotal = {CEN T ER, Vj ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
(|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality |) choose (|VESHG:(V,E)|Extreme Cardinality | − 1)
z2.
Proof. Let 2713
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei∗ , CEN T ER, Ej .
is a longest SuperHyperTotal taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2714

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperTotal. Thus the notion of quasi 2718
isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperTotal could be applied. The 2719
unique embedded SuperHyperTotal proposes some longest SuperHyperTotal excerpt 2720
from some representatives. The latter is straightforward. 2721
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperTotal. 2726
16 Extreme SuperHyperConnected But As The 2727
Forms 2729
Definition 16.1. (Different Extreme Types of Extreme SuperHyperConnected). 2730
(i) Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2734
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; and ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; 2735
(ii) Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ E 0 , ∃Ej ∈ E 0 , 2736
such that Va ∈ Ei , Ej ; ∀Ei , Ej ∈ E 0 , such that Va 6∈ Ei , Ej ; and 2737
|Ei |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Ej |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2738
(iii) Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2739
such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; 2740
(iv) Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected if ∀Vi ∈ EESHG:(V,E) \ V 0 , ∃Vj ∈ V 0 , 2741
such that Vi , Vj ∈ Ea ; ∀Vi , Vj ∈ V 0 , such that Vi , Vj 6∈ Ea ; and 2742
|Vi |Extreme CARDINALITY = |Vj |Extreme CARDINALITY ; 2743
(v) Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2744
e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2745
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected. 2746
Definition 16.2. ((Extreme) SuperHyperConnected). 2747
(i) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2750
v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and C(N SHG) 2752
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2753
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2754
Extreme SuperHyperEdges in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2755
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2757
(ii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2758
for a Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the maximum Extreme 2761
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperEdges of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2762
high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2763
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2764
(iii) an Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either 2765
of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2766
for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2768
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; and the Extreme power is corresponded to its 2773
(iv) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2775
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2776
(v) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2785
cardinality of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of high Extreme cardinality of the 2789
Extreme SuperHyperVertices in the consecutive Extreme sequence of Extreme 2790
Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2792
(vi) a Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected if it’s either of Extreme 2793
cardinality of the Extreme SuperHyperVertices of an Extreme SuperHyperSet S of 2797
high Extreme cardinality consecutive Extreme SuperHyperEdges and Extreme 2798
SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Extreme SuperHyperConnected; 2799
(vii) an Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s 2800
either of Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, 2801
Extreme v-SuperHyperConnected, and Extreme rv-SuperHyperConnected and 2802
C(N SHG) for an Extreme SuperHyperGraph N SHG : (V, E) is the Extreme 2803
(viii) a Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial if it’s either of 2810
Extreme e-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme re-SuperHyperConnected, Extreme 2811
SuperHyperConnected, is up. The Extreme Algorithm is Extremely 2823
straightforward. E1 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but E2 is 2824
a loop Extreme SuperHyperEdge and E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in 2825
the terms of Extreme SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme 2826
SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme 2827
isolated means that there’s no Extreme SuperHyperEdge has it as an Extreme 2828
endpoint. Thus the Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given 2829
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2830
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z.
straightforward. E1 , E2 and E3 are some empty Extreme SuperHyperEdges but 2833
E4 is an Extreme SuperHyperEdge. Thus in the terms of Extreme 2834
SuperHyperNeighbor, there’s only one Extreme SuperHyperEdge, namely, E4 . 2835
The Extreme SuperHyperVertex, V3 is Extreme isolated means that there’s no 2836
SuperHyperVertex, V3 , is excluded in every given Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2838


C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {E1 , E2 , E4 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z 3 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V4 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 15z 2 .

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 4z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Ei+19i=0 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 20z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+19i=0 }.

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)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial 10z 10 .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+119
i=11
, V22 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 20z 10 .

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 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 R-SuperHyperConnected = {V1 , V5 }.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 3z 2 .


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 .

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)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected = {Vi+2i=011 }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = 10z.

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 .
Then 2902
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme −2
=z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2903
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

corresponded to ViEXT ERN AL in the literatures of SuperHyperConnected. The latter is 2907
Extreme SuperHyperModel (23), is the SuperHyperConnected. 2911
Then 2913
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected =

−2
= {Ei }i=1 .
= (|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality − 1)
z Cardinality .
C(N SHG)Extreme R-Quasi-SuperHyperConnected
= {ViEXT ERN AL }i=1 Cardinality
.
|E | −2
Y
= |V EXT ERN AL ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z ESHG:(V,E) Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2914
P :
V2EXT ERN AL , E2 ,
V3EXT ERN AL , E3 ,
...,
E|EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 , V EXT ERN AL |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality −1 .

The term “EXTERNAL” implies |N (ViEXT ERN AL )|
≥ |N (Vj )| where Vj is 2917
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (24), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2922
Then 2924
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.

C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |EESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality z.
C(N SHG)Extreme R-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
Proof. Let 2925
P : ViEXT ERN AL , Ei , CEN T ER, Ej .

(25), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2935
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2938
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2943
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2944
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2947
SuperHyperBipartite ESHB : (V, E). Thus only some SuperHyperVertices and only 2948
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2956
C(N SHG)Extreme Quasi-SuperHyperConnected

i
ESHG:(V,E)
∈P ESHG:(V,E) |
= z min |Pi
i
C(N SHG)Extreme 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)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial

X X
EXT ERN AL |
Extreme Cardinality
Proof. Let 2959
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme 2960

straightforward. Then there’s no at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2964
quasi may be up but the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2965
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
P :
V1EXT ERN AL , E1 ,
V2EXT ERN AL , E2
in the Extreme SuperHyperModel (27), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2977
Then, 2979
∗
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected = {Ei ∈ EESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial
= |i | Ei ∈ |E ∗ ESHG:(V,E) |Extreme Cardinality |z.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected = {CEN T ER ∈ VESHG:(V,E) }.
C(N SHG)Extreme V-SuperHyperConnected SuperHyperPolynomial = z.
Proof. Let 2980
P : V EXT ERN AL i , E ∗ i , CEN T ER, Ej .

is a longest SuperHyperConnected taken from a connected Extreme SuperHyperWheel 2981

straightforward. Then there’s at least one SuperHyperConnected. Thus the notion of 2985
quasi isn’t up and the SuperHyperNotions based on SuperHyperConnected could be 2986
applied. The unique embedded SuperHyperConnected proposes some longest 2987
SuperHyperConnected excerpt from some representatives. The latter is 2988
the Extreme SuperHyperModel (28), is the Extreme SuperHyperConnected. 2994
17 Background 2995
There are some scientific researches covering the topic of this research. In what follows, 2996
there are some discussion and literature reviews about them. 2997
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “New Ideas In Recognition of 2998
Cancer And Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot” in Ref. [1] 2999
by Henry Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3000
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms with 3001
introducing used neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published 3002
in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Current Trends in Mass Communication 3003
(CTMC)” with ISO abbreviation “Curr Trends Mass Comm” in volume 2 and issue 1 3004
with pages 32-55. 3005
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Some Super Hyper Degrees 3006
and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper 3007
Graphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s Treatments” in Ref. [2] by Henry Garrett 3008
(2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph 3009
and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions and using vital tools 3010
in Cancer’s Treatments. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is entitled 3011
“Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with 3012
ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 1 with 3013
pages 35-47. The research article studies deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic 3014
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent 3015
results based on initial background and fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. 3016
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “A Research on Cancer’s 3017
Recognition and Neutrosophic Super Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and 3018
Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper Covering Versus Super separations” in Ref. [3] by Henry 3019
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3020
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental notions 3021
and using vital tools in Cancer’s Recognition. It’s published in prestigious and fancy 3022
journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3023
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3024
volume 2 and issue 3 with pages 136-148. The research article studies deeply with 3025
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3026
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3027
SuperHyperNumbers. 3028
The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3029
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction to Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3030
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Beyond ” in Ref. [4] by Henry Garrett (2023). 3031
In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and 3032
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using 3033
neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3034
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and 3035
Computational Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques 3036
Comput Math” in volume 2 and issue 6 with pages 221-307. The research article studies 3037
deeply with choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. 3038
It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and 3039
fundamental SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is 3040
titled “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on Neutrosophic Super 3041
Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and Neutrosophic Super Hyper 3042
Classes” in Ref. [5] by Henry Garrett (2022). In this research article, a novel approach 3043
is implemented on SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on 3044
fundamental SuperHyperNumber and using neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses of 3045
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in prestigious and fancy journal is 3046
entitled “Journal of Mathematical Techniques and Computational 3047
Mathematics(JMTCM)” with ISO abbreviation “J Math Techniques Comput Math” in 3048
choosing directly neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3050
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background and fundamental 3051
SuperHyperNumbers. The seminal paper and groundbreaking article is titled 3052
“neutrosophic co-degree and neutrosophic degree alongside chromatic numbers in the 3053
setting of some classes related to neutrosophic hypergraphs” in Ref. [6] by Henry 3054
Garrett (2023). In this research article, a novel approach is implemented on 3055
SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph based on general forms without 3056
using neutrosophic classes of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s published in 3057
prestigious and fancy journal is entitled “Journal of Current Trends in Computer 3058
Science Research (JCTCSR)” with ISO abbreviation “J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res” in 3059
choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph. It’s the 3061
breakthrough toward independent results based on initial background. The research 3062
article studies deeply with choosing neutrosophic hypergraphs instead of neutrosophic 3063
SuperHyperGraph. It’s the breakthrough toward independent results based on initial 3064
background. In some articles are titled “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing 3065
Numbers as (Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3066
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [7] by Henry Garrett (2022), “0049 — 3067
(Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic Graphs” in Ref. [8] by Henry Garrett 3068
(2022), “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of Confrontation under 3069
Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” 3070
in Ref. [9] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer 3071
Alongside The Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique 3072
inside Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition” in Ref. [10] by 3073
Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3074
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [11] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3075
“The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and Affected Cells Toward The 3076
Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New Multiple Definitions On the Sets 3077
Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory 3078
Based on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [12] by Henry 3079
Garrett (2022), “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The Worst Case 3080
of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In Cancer’s Recognition 3081
Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [13] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3082
“Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3083
Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in 3084
Ref. [14] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the 3085
Cancer’s Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3086
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed 3087
SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3088
Ref. [16] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To 3089
Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3090
Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [17] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed 3091
SuperHyperForcing in the SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs 3092
on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [18] by Henry Garrett 3093
(2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by Well- 3094
SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs ” in Ref. [19] by Henry Garrett 3095
(2022), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3096
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3097
in Ref. [15] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) 3098
SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions 3099
And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [20] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3100
“Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable 3101
To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” in Ref. [21] by 3102
Henry Garrett (2022),“(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3103
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances” in Ref. [22] by 3104
Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3105
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph 3106
With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions And Related 3107
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [23] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3108
“SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph With 3109
SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions” in Ref. [24] by Henry Garrett (2022), 3110
“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on Neutrosophic 3111
SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications in Cancer’s 3112
Treatments” in Ref. [25] by Henry Garrett (2022), “SuperHyperDominating and 3113
SuperHyperResolving on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in 3114
Game Theory and Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses” in Ref. [26] by Henry Garrett 3115
(2022), “SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To Monitor 3116
Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [201] by Henry 3117
Garrett (2023), “The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In The 3118
Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme SuperHyperMatching Set 3119
and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [202] by Henry Garrett 3120
(2023), “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the Cancer’s 3121
Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By SuperHyperModels 3122
Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [203] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3123
“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In Front of Cancer’s Attacks 3124
In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called 3125
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [204] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Perfect 3126
Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Forwarding 3127
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [207] by 3128
Henry Garrett (2023), “Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3129
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) 3130
SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique” in Ref. [208] by Henry 3131
Garrett (2023), “Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3132
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition modeled in 3133
the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [211] by Henry Garrett (2023), 3134
“Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To SuperHyperModel 3135
Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [214] by Henry 3136
Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form Neutrosophic 3137
SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In Special ViewPoints” 3138
in Ref. [215] by Henry Garrett (2023), “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s 3139
Recognition by Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in 3140
Ref. [216] by Henry Garrett (2023), “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3141
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3142
Recognition And Beyond ” in Ref. [217] by Henry Garrett (2022), “(Neutrosophic) 3143
1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) 3144
SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [218] by Henry Garrett (2022), “Basic Notions on 3145
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s 3146
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs” in Ref. [219] by Henry Garrett 3147
(2022), “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating and 3148
Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph” in Ref. [230] by Henry 3149
Garrett (2022), “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3150
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in Neutrosophic 3151
SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)” in Ref. [231] by Henry Garrett (2022), and [4–231], there 3152
are some endeavors to formalize the basic SuperHyperNotions about neutrosophic 3153
SuperHyperGraph and SuperHyperGraph alongside scientific research books 3154
at [232–360]. Two popular scientific research books in Scribd in the terms of high 3155
readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic science is on [361, 362]. 3156
Some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3157
proposed as book in Ref. [361] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3158
Scholar and has more than 4728 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Beyond Neutrosophic 3159
Graphs” and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book covers different types 3160
of notions and settings in neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic 3161
SuperHyperGraph theory. 3162
Also, some scientific studies and scientific researches about neutrosophic graphs, are 3163
proposed as book in Ref. [362] by Henry Garrett (2023) which is indexed by Google 3164
Scholar and has more than 5721 readers in Scribd. It’s titled “Neutrosophic Duality” 3165
and published by Dr. Henry Garrett. This research book presents different types of 3166
notions SuperHyperResolving and SuperHyperDominating in the setting of duality in 3167
neutrosophic graph theory and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph theory. This research 3168
book has scrutiny on the complement of the intended set and the intended set, 3169
simultaneously. It’s smart to consider a set but acting on its complement that what’s 3170
done in this research book which is popular in the terms of high readers in Scribd. 3171
See the seminal scientific researches [1–3]. The formalization of the notions on the 3172
framework of notions in SuperHyperGraphs, Neutrosophic notions in 3173
SuperHyperGraphs theory, and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs theory at [4–231] 3174
alongside scientific research books at [232–360]. Two popular scientific research books 3175
in Scribd ,in the terms of high readers, 4728 and 5721 respectively, on neutrosophic 3176
science is on [361, 362]. 3177
References 3178
1. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Recognition of Cancer And Neutrosophic 3179
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Curr Trends Mass Comm 3180
2(1) (2023) 32-55. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/new- 3181
ideas-in-recognition-of-cancer-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-as-hyper- 3182
tool-on-super-toot.pdf) 3183
2. Henry Garrett, “Some Super Hyper Degrees and Co-Super Hyper Degrees on 3184
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs And Super Hyper Graphs Alongside 3185
Applications in Cancer’s Treatments”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(1) 3186
(2023) 35-47. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/some- 3187
super-hyper-degrees-and-cosuper-hyper-degrees-on-neutrosophic-super-hyper- 3188
graphs-and-super-hyper-graphs-alongside-a.pdf) 3189
3. Henry Garrett, “A Research on Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic Super 3190
Hypergraph by Eulerian Super Hyper Cycles and Hamiltonian Sets as Hyper 3191
Covering Versus Super separations”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(3) 3192
(2023) 136-148. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access-articles/a- 3193
research-on-cancers-recognition-and-neutrosophic-super-hypergraph-by- 3194
eulerian-super-hyper-cycles-and-hamiltonian-sets-.pdf) 3195
4. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in the 3196
SuperHyperFunction to Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3197
Neutrosophic Recognition and Beyond ”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 2(6) 3198
(2023) 221-307. (https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access- 3199
articles/neutrosophic-1failed-superhyperforcing-in-the-superhyperfunction-to- 3200
use-neutrosophic-superhypergraphs-on-cancers-neutros.pdf) 3201
5. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Co-degree and Neutrosophic Degree alongside 3202
Chromatic Numbers in the Setting of Some Classes Related to Neutrosophic 3203
Hypergraphs”, J Curr Trends Comp Sci Res 2(1) (2023) 16-24. (doi: 3204
10.33140/JCTCSR.02.01.04) 3205
6. Henry Garrett, “Super Hyper Dominating and Super Hyper Resolving on 3206
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Graphs and Their Directions in Game Theory and 3207
Neutrosophic Super Hyper Classes”, J Math Techniques Comput Math 1(3) 3208
(2022) 242-263. (doi: 10.33140/JMTCM.01.03.09) 3209
7. Garrett, Henry. “0039 — Closing Numbers and Super-Closing Numbers as 3210
(Dual)Resolving and (Dual)Coloring alongside (Dual)Dominating in 3211
(Neutrosophic)n-SuperHyperGraph.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3212
Research - Zenodo, Nov. 2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear 3213
Research, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6319942. 3214
https://oa.mg/work/10.5281/zenodo.6319942 3215
8. Garrett, Henry. “0049 — (Failed)1-Zero-Forcing Number in Neutrosophic 3216
Graphs.” CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research - Zenodo, Feb. 3217
2022. CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research, 3218
https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724. 3219
https://oa.mg/work/10.13140/rg.2.2.35241.26724 3220
9. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3221
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3222
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010308 (doi: 3223
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3224
10. Henry Garrett, “Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3225
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3226
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3227
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3228
11. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In 3229
Cancer’s Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3230
2023010267 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1). 3231
12. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3232
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3233
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3234
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3235
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3236
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3237
13. Henry Garrett, “Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3238
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3239
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3240
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3241
14. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3242
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3243
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3244
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3245
15. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3246
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3247
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3248
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3249
16. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in Cancer’s 3250
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3251
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3252
17. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Messy-Style SuperHyperGraphs To Form 3253
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions 3254
In Special ViewPoints”, Preprints 2023, 2023010088 (doi: 3255
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3256
SuperHyperFunction To Use Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs on Cancer’s 3258
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3259
19. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperStable on Cancer’s Recognition by 3260
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3261
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3262
20. Henry Garrett, “Basic Notions on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperForcing And 3263
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling in Cancer’s Recognitions And 3264
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3266
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3270
22. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions 3271
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3272
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3273
23. Henry Garrett, “(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperAlliances With SuperHyperDefensive 3274
and SuperHyperOffensive Type-SuperHyperSet On (Neutrosophic) 3275
SuperHyperGraph With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s 3276
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3277
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3278
24. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth on SuperHyperGraph and Neutrosophic 3279
SuperHyperGraph With SuperHyperModeling of Cancer’s Recognitions”, 3280
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3281
25. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3282
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3283
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3284
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3285
26. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating and SuperHyperResolving on 3286
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And Their Directions in Game Theory and 3287
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3288
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3289
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple 3291
On Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8092796). 3292
28. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Reverse 3293
Strict Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3294
SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8092766). 3295
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3297
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8088438). 3298
30. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Unequal 3299
Dimension Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3300
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3303
Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8084436). 3304
32. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Strict 3305
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Strict Connective As Hyper Conceit On Super 3309
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080100). 3310
34. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse Strict 3311
Connective In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3312
Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080068). 3313
SuperHyperGraph By Unequal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3315
Super Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8078445). 3316
36. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Unequal 3317
Connective Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3318
SuperHyperGraph By Strict Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3321
38. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Strict 3323
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On 3327
Super Dimity”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8072171). 3328
40. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Reverse 3329
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3333
42. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Equal 3335
SuperHyperGraph By Dimension Dominating As Hyper Dimple On Super 3339
44. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Dimity By Hyper Dimple Of Dimension 3341
Dominating In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3342
SuperHyperGraph By Reverse Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3345
46. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Reverse 3347
SuperHyperGraph By Equal Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On 3351
48. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Equal 3353
SuperHyperGraph By Connective Dominating As Hyper Conceit On Super 3357
Con”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8051346). 3358
50. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Con By Hyper Conceit Of Connective 3359
SuperHyperGraph By United Dominating As Hyper Ultra On Super Units”, 3363
52. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Units By Hyper Ultra Of United 3365
SuperHyperGraph By Zero Forcing As Hyper ford On Super forceps”, Zenodo 3369
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8017246). 3370
54. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super forceps By Hyper ford Of Zero Forcing In 3371
Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3372
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020128). 3373
SuperHyperGraph By Matrix-Based As Hyper mat On Super matte”, Zenodo 3375
2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978571). 3376
56. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super mat By Hyper matte Of Matrix-Based In 3377
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, 3378
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978857). 3379
SuperHyperGraph By Dominating-Edges As Hyper Dome On Super Eddy”, 3381
58. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Dome Of 3383
Dominating-Edges In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3384
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Gap As Hyper Gape On Super Gab”, Zenodo 2023, 3387
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7916595). 3388
60. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gab By Hyper Gape Of Edge-Gap In 3389
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923632). 3391
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3393
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7904698). 3394
62. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulous By Hyper Nebbish Of 3395
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3396
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3399
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3400
10.5281/zenodo.7904529). 3401
64. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Decompensation By Hyper Decompress Of 3402
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3403
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3404
10.5281/zenodo.7904401). 3405
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3407
Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7871026). 3408
Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3410
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3413
Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3416
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3419
Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7855661). 3420
Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3422
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3425
72. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super EULA By Hyper Eulogy Of 3427
Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3428
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3431
Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3434
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3437
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7839333). 3438
Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3440
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super 3443
EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7834229). 3444
Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3446
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3449
Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3452
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3455
Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3458
SuperHyperGraph As Hyper Tool On Super Toot”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3461
10.5281/zenodo.7812236). 3462
SuperHyperGraph By initial Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper initial Eulogy On 3464
Super initial EULA”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809365). 3465
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy-Path-Cut On Super 3467
EULA-Path-Cut”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7809358). 3468
Eulerian-Path-Cut In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3470
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian-Path-Cut As Hyper Eulogy On Super EULA”, 3473
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On 3476
Super Nebulous”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7806767). 3477
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3479
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper 3482
Decompress On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 3483
10.5281/zenodo.7804238). 3484
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With 3486
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7804228). 3487
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3489
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7799902). 3490
93. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Hammy By Hyper Hamper Of 3491
Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3492
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3495
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress 3498
On Super Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7793372). 3499
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super 3501
Hammy”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7791952). 3502
Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3504
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super 3507
Hamiltonian-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3510
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On 3513
Hamiltonian-Decomposition In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3516
SuperHyperGraph By Hamiltonian-Cut As Hyper Hamper On Super Hammy”, 3519
Hamiltonian-Cut In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3522
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3525
Trace-Neighbor In Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) 3528
106. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition And Neutrosophic 3530
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3531
Decompensation”, Zenodo 2023, (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7771831). 3532
Trace-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3534
SuperHyperGraph By Trace-Cut As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3537
ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20913.25446). 3538
109. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Tract By Hyper Track Of Trace-Cut In 3539
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7764916). 3541
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3543
Edge-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3546
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3549
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22545.10089). 3550
Edge-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3552
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29544.34564). 3553
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Cut As Hyper Edify On Super Eddy”, ResearchGate 3555
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11377.76644). 3556
115. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Eddy By Hyper Edify Of Edge-Cut In 3557
Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3558
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23750.96329). 3559
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3561
Vertex-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3564
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Decomposition As Hyper Decompress On Super 3567
Decompensation”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30212.81289). 3568
Vertex-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3570
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Cut As Hyper Vertu On Super Vertigo”, 3573
121. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Vertigo By Hyper Vertu Of Vertex-Cut In 3575
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32467.25124). 3577
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Neighbor As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3579
123. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3581
Stable-Neighbor In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3582
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Decompositions As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3585
125. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of 3587
Stable-Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3588
SuperHyperGraph By Stable-Cut As Hyper Stain On Super Stagy”, 3591
127. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Stale By Hyper Stalk Of Stable-Cut In 3593
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20170.24000). 3595
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Neighbors As Hyper Nebbish On Super Nebulous”, 3597
129. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nebulizer By Hyper Nub Of 3599
Clique-Neighbors In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3600
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Decompositions As Hyper Decompile On Super 3603
Decommission”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18780.87683). 3604
Clique- Decompositions In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3606
SuperHyperGraph By Clique-Cut As Hyper Click On Super Cliche”, 3609
133. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Cliff By Hyper Cling Of Clique-Cut In 3611
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27392.30721). 3613
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Spin On Super Spacy”, ResearchGate 3615
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33028.40321). 3616
SuperHyperGraph By List- Coloring As Hyper List On Super Lisle”, 3618
136. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Lith By Hyper Lite Of List-Coloring In 3620
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16356.04489). 3622
SuperHyperGraph By Space As Hyper Sparse On Super Spark ”, ResearchGate 3624
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21756.21129). 3625
138. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Solidarity By Hyper Soul Of Space In 3626
Cancer’s Recognition With (Extreme) SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, 3627
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30983.68009). 3628
SuperHyperGraph By Edge-Connectivity As Hyper Disclosure On Super 3630
Closure”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28552.29445). 3631
140. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Uniform By Hyper Deformation Of 3632
Edge-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3633
SuperHyperGraph By Vertex-Connectivity As Hyper Leak On Super Structure”, 3636
142. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super System By Hyper Explosions Of 3638
Vertex-Connectivity In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3639
SuperHyperGraph By Tree-Decomposition As Hyper Forward On Super Returns”, 3642
144. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Nodes By Hyper Moves Of 3644
Tree-Decomposition In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3645
SuperHyperGraph By Chord As Hyper Excellence On Super Excess”, 3648
146. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gap By Hyper Navigations Of Chord In 3650
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11172.14720). 3652
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination As Hyper Controller On 3654
Super Waves”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22011.80165). 3655
148. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Coincidence By Hyper Routes Of 3656
SuperHyper(i,j)-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3657
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperEdge-Domination As Hyper Reversion On 3660
Super Indirection”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10493.84962). 3661
150. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Obstacles By Hyper Model Of 3662
SuperHyperEdge-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3663
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Domination As Hyper k-Actions On Super 3666
Patterns”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19944.14086). 3667
152. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Harmony By Hyper k-Function Of 3668
SuperHyperK-Domination In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3669
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperK-Number As Hyper k-Partition On Super 3672
Layers”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33103.76968). 3673
154. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Gradient By Hyper k-Class Of 3674
SuperHyperK-Number In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3675
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperOrder As Hyper Enumerations On Super 3678
Landmarks”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35646.56641). 3679
156. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Analogous By Hyper Visions Of 3680
SuperHyperOrder In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3681
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Categories On Super 3684
Neighbors”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13973.81121). 3685
158. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Relations By Hyper Identifications Of 3686
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3687
159. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Contradiction By Hyper Detection of 3689
SuperHyperDefensive In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3690
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDimension As Hyper Distinguishing On Super 3693
Distances”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31956.88961). 3694
161. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Locations By Hyper Differing Of 3695
SuperHyperDimension In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3696
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDominating As Hyper Closing On Super 3699
Messy”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.21510.45125). 3700
163. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Missing By Hyper Searching Of 3701
SuperHyperDominating In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3702
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnected As Hyper Group On Super Surge”, 3705
165. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Outbreak By Hyper Collections Of 3707
SuperHyperConnected In Cancer’s Recognition With (Neutrosophic) 3708
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperTotal As Hyper Covering On Super Infections”, 3711
167. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Extremism By Hyper Treatments Of 3713
SuperHyperTotal In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3714
168. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Isolation By Hyper Perfectness Of 3716
SuperHyperPerfect In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3717
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperPerfect As Hyper Idealism On Super Vacancy”, 3720
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperJoin As Hyper Separations On Super Sorts”, 3723
171. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super connections By Hyper disconnections Of 3725
SuperHyperJoin In Cancer’s Recognition with (Neutrosophic) 3726
172. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Mixed-Devastations By Hyper Decisions 3728
Of SuperHyperDuality In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3729
173. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3731
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperDuality As Hyper Imaginations On Super 3732
Mixed-Illustrations”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33275.80161). 3733
174. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas In Cancer’s Recognition As (Neutrosophic) 3734
SuperHyperGraph By Path SuperHyperColoring As Hyper Correction On Super 3735
Faults”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30182.50241). 3736
175. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Reflections By Hyper Rotations Of Path 3737
SuperHyperColoring In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3738
176. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Deformations On Super Chains In 3740
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By 3741
SuperHyperDensity”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13444.60806). 3742
177. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas As Hyper Ignorance By SuperHyperDensity On 3743
Super Resistances In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and Neutrosophic 3744
SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.16800.05123). 3745
178. Henry Garrett, “New Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3746
SuperHyperGraph By Eulerian SuperHyperCycles and Hamiltonian Sets As 3747
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-VI ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3748
10.13140/RG.2.2.29913.80482). 3749
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-V ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3752
10.13140/RG.2.2.33269.24809). 3753
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-IV ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3756
10.13140/RG.2.2.34946.96960). 3757
181. Henry Garrett, “A Research On Cancer’s Recognition and Neutrosophic 3758
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-III ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3760
10.13140/RG.2.2.14814.31040). 3761
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-II ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3764
10.13140/RG.2.2.15653.17125). 3765
Hyper Covering Versus Super separations-I ”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3768
10.13140/RG.2.2.25719.50089). 3769
184. Henry Garrett, “New Ideas On Super Disruptions In Cancer’s Extreme 3770
Recognition As Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph By Hyper Plans Called 3771
SuperHyperConnectivities”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3772
10.13140/RG.2.2.29441.94562). 3773
185. Henry Garrett, “Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition As Neutrosophic 3774
SuperHyperGraph By SuperHyperConnectivities As Hyper Diagnosis On Super 3775
Mechanism”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17252.24968). 3776
186. Henry Garrett,“Cancer’s Recognition and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph By 3777
the Criteria of Eulerian and Hamiltonian Type-Sets As Hyper Modified Cycles 3778
On Super Mess”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16652.59525). 3779
187. Henry Garrett,“Eulerian and Hamiltonian In Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3780
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph On Super Interactions By Hyper Extensions 3781
of Cycles”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34583.24485). 3782
188. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Type-Results on extreme SuperHyperGirth 3783
theory and (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs Toward Cancer’s extreme 3784
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010396 (doi: 3785
10.20944/preprints202301.0396.v1). 3786
189. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Warns Hyper Landmark of 3787
neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth In Super Type-Versions of Cancer’s neutrosophic 3788
Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 2023010395 (doi: 3789
10.20944/preprints202301.0395.v1). 3790
190. Henry Garrett,“The Constructions of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs on the 3791
Cancer’s Recognition in The Confrontation With Super Attacks In Hyper 3792
Situations By Implementing (Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing in The 3793
Technical Approaches to Neutralize SuperHyperViews”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3794
10.13140/RG.2.2.26240.51204). 3795
191. Henry Garrett,“(Neutrosophic) 1-Failed SuperHyperForcing As the 3796
Entrepreneurs on Cancer’s Recognitions To Fail Forcing Style As the Super 3797
Classes With Hyper Effects In The Background of the Framework is So-Called 3798
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 3799
10.13140/RG.2.2.12818.73925). 3800
192. Henry Garrett,“Super Actions On The Types of Hyper Levels In The Sensible 3801
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth On Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition and 3802
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 3803
10.13140/RG.2.2.26836.88960). 3804
193. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperGirth Approaches on the Super Challenges on the 3805
Cancer’s Recognition In the Hyper Model of (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph”, 3806
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36745.93289). 3807
194. Henry Garrett,“Extreme SuperHyperClique as the Firm Scheme of 3808
Confrontation under Cancer’s Recognition as the Model in The Setting of 3809
10.20944/preprints202301.0308.v1). 3811
195. Henry Garrett,“Uncertainty On The Act And Effect Of Cancer Alongside The 3812
Foggy Positions Of Cells Toward Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique inside 3813
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs Titled Cancer’s Recognition”, Preprints 2023, 3814
2023010282 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0282.v1). 3815
196. Henry Garrett,“Neutrosophic Version Of Separates Groups Of Cells In Cancer’s 3816
Recognition On Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010267 3817
(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0267.v1).). 3818
197. Henry Garrett, “The Shift Paradigm To Classify Separately The Cells and 3819
Affected Cells Toward The Totality Under Cancer’s Recognition By New 3820
Multiple Definitions On the Sets Polynomials Alongside Numbers In The 3821
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperMatching Theory Based on SuperHyperGraph and 3822
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Preprints 2023, 2023010265 (doi: 3823
10.20944/preprints202301.0265.v1). 3824
198. Henry Garrett,“Breaking the Continuity and Uniformity of Cancer In The 3825
Worst Case of Full Connections With Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique In 3826
Cancer’s Recognition Applied in (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 3827
2023, 2023010262,(doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0262.v1). 3828
199. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable as the Survivors on the 3829
Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition Based on Uncertainty to All Modes in 3830
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010240 (doi: 3831
10.20944/preprints202301.0240.v1). 3832
200. Henry Garrett, “Extremism of the Attacked Body Under the Cancer’s 3833
Circumstances Where Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3834
SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 2023010224, (doi: 3835
10.20944/preprints202301.0224.v1). 3836
201. Henry Garrett,“SuperHyperMatching By (R-)Definitions And Polynomials To 3837
Monitor Cancer’s Recognition In Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, 3838
ResearchGate 2023,(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35061.65767). 3839
202. Henry Garrett,“The Focus on The Partitions Obtained By Parallel Moves In 3840
The Cancer’s Extreme Recognition With Different Types of Extreme 3841
SuperHyperMatching Set and Polynomial on (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, 3842
203. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3844
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3845
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3846
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3847
204. Henry Garrett,“Indeterminacy On The All Possible Connections of Cells In 3848
Front of Cancer’s Attacks In The Terms of Neutrosophic Failed 3849
SuperHyperClique on Cancer’s Recognition called Neutrosophic 3850
SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15897.70243). 3851
205. Henry Garrett,“Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique Decides the Failures on the 3852
Cancer’s Recognition in the Perfect Connections of Cancer’s Attacks By 3853
SuperHyperModels Named (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3854
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32530.73922). 3855
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3857
2023010105 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3858
207. Henry Garrett,“Perfect Directions Toward Idealism in Cancer’s Neutrosophic 3859
Recognition Forwarding Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique on Neutrosophic 3860
208. Henry Garrett,“Demonstrating Complete Connections in Every Embedded 3862
Regions and Sub-Regions in the Terms of Cancer’s Recognition and 3863
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClique”, 3864
10.20944/preprints202301.0105.v1). 3869
10.20944/preprints202301.0088.v1). 3873
211. Henry Garrett,“Different Neutrosophic Types of Neutrosophic Regions titled 3874
neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable in Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognition 3875
modeled in the Form of Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2023, 3876
(doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17385.36968). 3877
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, Preprints 2023, 2023010044 3880
Well- SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, Preprints 2023, 3882
2023010043 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202301.0043.v1). 3883
214. Henry Garrett, “Using the Tool As (Neutrosophic) Failed SuperHyperStable To 3884
SuperHyperModel Cancer’s Recognition Titled (Neutrosophic) 3885
Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable To Act on Cancer’s Neutrosophic Recognitions In 3888
Special ViewPoints”, ResearchGate 2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11447.80803). 3889
Well-SuperHyperModelled (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 3891
2023, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35774.77123). 3892
Neutrosophic Recognition And Beyond ”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3895
10.13140/RG.2.2.36141.77287). 3896
Recognitions And (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3898
10.13140/RG.2.2.29430.88642). 3899
(Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraphs”, ResearchGate 2022, (doi: 3902
10.13140/RG.2.2.11369.16487). 3903
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, Preprints 3905
2022, 2022120549 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0549.v1). 3906
Featuring (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperDefensive SuperHyperAlliances”, 3908
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 3913
2022120540 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0540.v1). 3914
Recognitions And Related (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 3918
2022, (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14426.41923). 3919
Preprints 2022, 2022120500 (doi: 10.20944/preprints202212.0500.v1). 3922
ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20993.12640). 3925
226. Henry Garrett,“Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3926
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs and SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3927
in Cancer’s Treatments”, Preprints 2022, 2022120324 (doi: 3928
10.20944/preprints202212.0324.v1). 3929
227. Henry Garrett, “Some SuperHyperDegrees and Co-SuperHyperDegrees on 3930
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraphs And SuperHyperGraphs Alongside Applications 3931
in Cancer’s Treatments”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3932
10.13140/RG.2.2.23123.04641). 3933
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, Preprints 2022, 2022110576 (doi: 3936
10.20944/preprints202211.0576.v1). 3937
Neutrosophic SuperHyperClasses”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3940
10.13140/RG.2.2.23324.56966). 3941
230. Henry Garrett, “Basic Neutrosophic Notions Concerning SuperHyperDominating 3942
and Neutrosophic SuperHyperResolving in SuperHyperGraph”, ResearchGate 3943
2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29173.86244). 3944
231. Henry Garrett, “Initial Material of Neutrosophic Preliminaries to Study Some 3945
Neutrosophic Notions Based on Neutrosophic SuperHyperEdge (NSHE) in 3946
Neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph (NSHG)”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi: 3947
10.13140/RG.2.2.25385.88160). 3948
232. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Strict Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3949
Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8092816). 3950
233. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3951
Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8090194). 3952
234. Henry Garrett, “Strict Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3953
235. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Strict Connective In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3955
Garrett, 2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8080167). 3956
236. Henry Garrett, “Unequal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3957
237. Henry Garrett, “Strict Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3959
238. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3961
239. Henry Garrett, “Equal Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3963
240. Henry Garrett, “Dimension Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3965
241. Henry Garrett, “Reverse Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3967
242. Henry Garrett, “Equal Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3969
243. Henry Garrett, “Connective Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3971
244. Henry Garrett, “United Dominating In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3973
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8027488). 3974
245. Henry Garrett, “Zero Forcing In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3975
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8020181). 3976
246. Henry Garrett, “Matrix-Based In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3977
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7978921). 3978
247. Henry Garrett, “Collections of Math II”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 3979
10.5281/zenodo.7943878). 3980
248. Henry Garrett, “Dominating-Edges In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3981
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7943871). 3982
249. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Gap In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 3983
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7923786). 3984
250. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3985
251. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 3987
252. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3989
253. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 3991
254. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3993
255. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 3995
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7854561). 3996
256. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3997
257. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 3999
258. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Type-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4001
259. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4003
260. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4005
261. Henry Garrett, “Eulerian-Path-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4007
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7812750). 4008
262. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4009
263. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. 4011
264. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Type-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4013
265. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4015
266. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. 4017
267. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cycle-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4019
268. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4021
269. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4023
270. Henry Garrett, “Hamiltonian-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4025
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7783791). 4026
271. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4027
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7780123). 4028
272. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4029
273. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDuality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4031
10.5281/zenodo.7637762). 4032
274. Henry Garrett, “Trace-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4033
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7766174). 4034
275. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4035
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7762232). 4036
276. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4037
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7758601). 4038
277. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4039
10.5281/zenodo.7754661). 4040
278. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4041
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7750995) . 4042
279. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4043
280. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4045
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7747236). 4046
281. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Neighbor In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4047
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7742587). 4048
282. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4049
283. Henry Garrett, “Stable-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4051
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7734719). 4052
284. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Neighbors In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4053
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7730484). 4054
285. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Decompositions In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry 4055
286. Henry Garrett, “Clique-Cut In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4057
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7722865). 4058
287. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4059
10.5281/zenodo.7713563). 4060
288. Henry Garrett, “Space In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4061
10.5281/zenodo.7709116). 4062
289. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4063
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706415). 4064
290. Henry Garrett, “Vertex-Connectivity In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4065
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7706063). 4066
291. Henry Garrett, “Tree-Decomposition In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4067
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7701906). 4068
292. Henry Garrett, “Chord In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4069
10.5281/zenodo.7700205). 4070
293. Henry Garrett, “(i,j)-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4071
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7694876). 4072
294. Henry Garrett, “Edge-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4073
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7679410). 4074
295. Henry Garrett, “K-Domination In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4075
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7675982). 4076
296. Henry Garrett, “K-Number In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4077
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7672388). 4078
297. Henry Garrett, “Order In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4079
10.5281/zenodo.7668648). 4080
298. Henry Garrett, “Coloring In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4081
10.5281/zenodo.7662810). 4082
299. Henry Garrett, “Dimension In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4083
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7659162). 4084
300. Henry Garrett, “Cancer In SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4085
10.5281/zenodo.7653233). 4086
301. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperWheel ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4087
10.5281/zenodo.7653204). 4088
302. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMultipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4089
10.5281/zenodo.7653142). 4090
303. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperBipartite”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4091
10.5281/zenodo.7653117). 4092
304. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStar ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4093
10.5281/zenodo.7653089). 4094
305. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4095
10.5281/zenodo.7651687). 4096
306. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPath”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4097
10.5281/zenodo.7651619). 4098
307. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDomination”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4099
10.5281/zenodo.7651439). 4100
308. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDominating”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4101
10.5281/zenodo.7650729). 4102
309. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnected ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4103
10.5281/zenodo.7647868). 4104
310. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperTotal ”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4105
10.5281/zenodo.7647017). 4106
311. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperPerfect”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4107
10.5281/zenodo.7644894). 4108
312. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperJoin”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4109
10.5281/zenodo.7641880). 4110
313. Henry Garrett, “Path SuperHyperColoring”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4111
10.5281/zenodo.7632923). 4112
314. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperDensity”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4113
10.5281/zenodo.7623459). 4114
315. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4115
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4116
316. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4117
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7606416). 4118
317. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperConnectivities”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4119
10.5281/zenodo.7606404). 4120
318. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4121
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4122
319. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4123
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4124
320. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4125
10.5281/zenodo.7580018). 4126
321. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperCycle”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4127
10.5281/zenodo.7579929). 4128
322. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4129
10.5281/zenodo.7563170). 4130
323. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4131
10.5281/zenodo.7563164). 4132
324. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4133
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4134
325. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4135
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4136
326. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperGirth”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4137
10.5281/zenodo.7563160). 4138
327. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4139
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7557063). 4140
328. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4141
10.5281/zenodo.7557009). 4142
329. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4143
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4144
330. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4145
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4146
331. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4147
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4148
332. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4149
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4150
333. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4151
10.5281/zenodo.7574952). 4152
334. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4153
10.5281/zenodo.7574992). 4154
335. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4155
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4156
336. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4157
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4158
337. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4159
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4160
338. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4161
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4162
339. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4163
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4164
340. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4165
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4166
341. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4167
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4168
342. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4169
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4170
343. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 4171
2023 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4172
344. Henry Garrett, “Extreme Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4173
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4174
345. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4175
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4176
346. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4177
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4178
347. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4179
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4180
348. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4181
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4182
349. Henry Garrett, “Extreme SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4183
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4184
350. Henry Garrett, “Overlook On SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 4185
(doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4186
351. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperMatching”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4187
10.5281/zenodo.7539484). 4188
352. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4189
10.5281/zenodo.7523390). 4190
353. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperClique”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4191
10.5281/zenodo.7523357). 4192
354. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4193
10.5281/zenodo.7504782). 4194
355. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperStable”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4195
10.5281/zenodo.7499395). 4196
356. Henry Garrett, “Failed SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4197
10.5281/zenodo.7497450). 4198
357. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperForcing”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4199
10.5281/zenodo.7494862). 4200
358. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperAlliances”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4201
10.5281/zenodo.7493845). 4202
359. Henry Garrett, “SuperHyperGraphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4203
10.5281/zenodo.7480110). 4204
360. Henry Garrett, “Neut. SuperHyperEdges”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4205
10.5281/zenodo.7378758). 4206
361. Henry Garrett, “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4207
10.5281/zenodo.6320305). 4208
362. Henry Garrett, “Neutrosophic Duality”. Dr. Henry Garrett, 2023 (doi: 4209
10.5281/zenodo.6677173). 4210
View publication stats

New Ideas On Super Perfidy by Hyper Perf of SuperHyperPerfect Search in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

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 On Super Perfidy by Hyper Perf of SuperHyperPerfect Search in Recognition of Cancer With (Neutrosophic) SuperHyperGraph

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

New Ideas On Super Perﬁdy By Hyper Perf Of SuperHyperPerfect Search In

Preprint · July 2023

525 PUBLICATIONS 25,367 CITATIONS

Featured Articles View project

On Algebraic Structures and Algebraic Hyperstructures View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Ideas On Super Perfidy By Hyper Perf Of 2

SuperHyperPerfect Search In Recognition of Cancer With 3

Henry Garrett · Independent Researcher · Department of Mathematics · 6

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

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

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

Neutrosophic SuperHyperVertices such that they form the Neutrosophic 62