Neutrosophic K-Number

Neutrosophic k-Number
Ideas | Approaches | Accessibility | Availability
Dr. Henry Garrett

Report | Exposition | References | Research #22 2022
Abstract
In this book, some notions are introduced about “Neutrosophic k-Number”.

Two chapters are devised as “Initial Notions”, and “Modified Notions”. Two
manuscripts are cited as the references of these chapters which are my 91st, and
92nd manuscripts. I’ve used my 91st, and 92nd manuscripts to write this book.
In first chapter, there are some points as follow. New setting is introduced to
study k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number arising from k-number-dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs
assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Minimum number of k-number-dominated
vertices, is a number which is representative based on those vertices. Min-
imum neutrosophic number of k-number-dominated vertices corresponded to
k-number-dominating set is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating num-
ber. Forming sets from k-number-dominated vertices to figure out different
types of number of vertices in the sets from k-number-dominated sets in the
terms of minimum number of vertices to get minimum number to assign to
neutrosophic graphs is key type of approach to have these notions namely
k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic k-number-dominating number
arising from k-number-dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to
neutrosophic graphs. Two numbers and one set are assigned to a neutrosophic
graph, are obtained but now both settings lead to approach is on demand which
is to compute and to find representatives of sets having smallest number of k-
number-dominated vertices from different types of sets in the terms of minimum
number and minimum neutrosophic number forming it to get minimum number
to assign to a neutrosophic graph. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic
graph. Then for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk
k-number-dominate n. Let S be a set of neutrosophic vertices [a vertex alongside
triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic
vertex n in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such
that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic vertices,
S is called k-number-dominating set. The minimum cardinality between all k-
number-dominating sets is called k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted
by N k (N T G); for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk
S is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating set. The minimum neutrosophic
i
Abstract
cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is called neutrosophic k-

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by Nnk (N T G). As concluding
results, there are some statements, remarks, examples and clarifications about
some classes of neutrosophic graphs namely path-neutrosophic graphs, cycle-
neutrosophic graphs, complete-neutrosophic graphs, star-neutrosophic graphs,
complete-bipartite-neutrosophic graphs, complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graphs,
and wheel-neutrosophic graphs. The clarifications are also presented in both
sections “Setting of k-number-dominating number,” and “Setting of neutro-
sophic k-number-dominating number,” for introduced results and used classes.
This approach facilitates identifying sets which form k-number-dominating
number and neutrosophic k-number-dominating number arising from k-number-
dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs.
In both settings, some classes of well-known neutrosophic graphs are studied.
Some clarifications for each result and each definition are provided. The
cardinality of set of k-number-dominated vertices and neutrosophic cardinality
of set of k-number-dominated vertices corresponded to k-number-dominating
set have eligibility to define k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic
k-number-dominating number but different types of set of k-number-dominated
vertices to define k-number-dominating sets. Some results get more frameworks
and more perspectives about these definitions. The way in that, different types
of set of k-number-dominated vertices in the terms of minimum number to
assign to neutrosophic graphs, opens the way to do some approaches. These
notions are applied into neutrosophic graphs as individuals but not family of
them as drawbacks for these notions. Finding special neutrosophic graphs
which are well-known, is an open way to pursue this study. Neutrosophic
k-number-dominating notion is applied to different settings and classes of
neutrosophic graphs. Some problems are proposed to pursue this study. Basic
familiarities with graph theory and neutrosophic graph theory are proposed for
this chapter.
In second chapter, there are some points as follow. New setting is introduced to
study k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving number
arising from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to
neutrosophic graphs. Minimum number of k-number-resolved vertices, is a
number which is representative based on those vertices. Minimum neutrosophic
number of k-number-resolved vertices corresponded to k-number-resolving
set is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number. Forming sets from
k-number-resolved vertices to figure out different types of number of vertices
in the sets from k-number-resolved sets in the terms of minimum number of
vertices to get minimum number to assign to neutrosophic graphs is key type
of approach to have these notions namely k-number-resolving number and neut-
rosophic k-number-resolving number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in
neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Two numbers and one
set are assigned to a neutrosophic graph, are obtained but now both settings
lead to approach is on demand which is to compute and to find representatives
of sets having smallest number of k-number-resolved vertices from different
types of sets in the terms of minimum number and minimum neutrosophic
number forming it to get minimum number to assign to a neutrosophic graph.
Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then for given vertices n
and n0 if d(s1 , n) 6= d(s1 , n0 ), d(s2 , n) 6= d(s2 , n0 ), . . . , d(sk , n) 6= d(sk , n0 ), then
ii
s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 . Let S be a set of neutrosophic vertices
[a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If
for every neutrosophic vertices n and n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutro-
sophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n
and n0 , then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-resolving
set. The minimum cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called
k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G); for given vertices n
[a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for
every neutrosophic vertices n and n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic ver-
tices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 , then
the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving
set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-resolving
sets is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
Nnk (N T G). As concluding results, there are some statements, remarks, ex-
amples and clarifications about some classes of neutrosophic graphs namely
path-neutrosophic graphs, cycle-neutrosophic graphs, complete-neutrosophic
graphs, star-neutrosophic graphs, complete-bipartite-neutrosophic graphs,
complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graphs, and wheel-neutrosophic graphs. The
clarifications are also presented in both sections “Setting of k-number-resolving
number,” and “Setting of neutrosophic k-number-resolving number,” for in-
troduced results and used classes. This approach facilitates identifying sets
which form k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving
number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs as-
signed to neutrosophic graphs. In both settings, some classes of well-known
neutrosophic graphs are studied. Some clarifications for each result and each
definition are provided. The cardinality of set of k-number-resolved vertices
and neutrosophic cardinality of set of k-number-resolved vertices corresponded
to k-number-resolving set have eligibility to define k-number-resolving number
and neutrosophic k-number-resolving number but different types of set of
k-number-resolved vertices to define k-number-resolving sets. Some results
get more frameworks and more perspectives about these definitions. The
way in that, different types of set of k-number-resolved vertices in the terms
of minimum number to assign to neutrosophic graphs, opens the way to do
some approaches. These notions are applied into neutrosophic graphs as
individuals but not family of them as drawbacks for these notions. Finding
special neutrosophic graphs which are well-known, is an open way to pursue this
study. Neutrosophic k-number-resolving notion is applied to different settings
and classes of neutrosophic graphs. Some problems are proposed to pursue this
study. Basic familiarities with graph theory and neutrosophic graph theory are
proposed for this chapter.
The following references are cited by chapters.
[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Regularity of Every Element to Function in the

Type of Domination in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.22861.10727).
[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Recognition of the Pattern for Vertices to Make
iii
Abstract
Dimension by Resolving in some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchG-

ate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27281.51046).
Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as
books in following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar
and has more than 300 readers in Scribd.
[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio:

E-publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grand-
view Heights, Ohio 43212 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-725-6
(http://fs.unm.edu/BeyondNeutrosophicGraphs.pdf).
And in following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar

and has more than 1000 readers in Scribd.
[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida:

GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste
950 Miami, Florida 33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf ).
Two chapters are devised as “Initial Notions”, and “Modified Notions”.
iv
Acknowledgements
The author is going to express his gratitude and his appreciation about the
brains and their hands which are showing the importance of words in the
framework of every wisdom, knowledge, arts, and emotions which are streaming
in the lines from the words, notions, ideas and approaches to have the material The words of mind and the
and the contents which are only the way to flourish the minds, to grow the minds of words, are too
eligible to be in the stage
notions, to advance the ways and to make the stable ways to be amid events of acknowledgements
and storms of minds for surviving from them and making the outstanding
experiences about the tools and the ideas to be on the star lines of words and
shining like stars, forever.
v
Contents
Abstract i
Acknowledgements v
Contents vii
List of Figures ix
List of Tables xii
1 Initial Notions 1
1.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Motivation and Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5 Setting of k-number-dominating number . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.6 Setting of neutrosophic k-number-dominating number . . . . . 34
1.7 Applications in Time Table and Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . 63
1.8 Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its k-number-
dominating number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
1.9 Case 2: Complete Model alongside its Neutrosophic Graph
in the Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating number and its
neutrosophic k-number-dominating number . . . . . . . . . . . 66
1.10 Open Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
1.11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Bibliography 71
2 Modified Notions 73
2.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2.3 Motivation and Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
2.4 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
2.5 Setting of k-number-resolving number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.6 Setting of neutrosophic k-number-resolving number . . . . . . 108
2.7 Applications in Time Table and Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . 136
vii
Contents
2.8 Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its k-number-

resolving number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving
number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
2.9 Case 2: Complete Model alongside its Neutrosophic Graph
in the Viewpoint of its k-number-resolving number and its
neutrosophic k-number-resolving number . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
2.10 Open Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
2.11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Bibliography 145
viii
List of Figures
1.1 A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number. . . . . 9
ix
List of Figures

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number . . . . 64
number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number . . . . 66
2.1 A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-resolving

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number. . . . . . 81
number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number . . . . . . 137
x
List of Figures

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number . . . . . . 140
xi
List of Tables
1.1 Scheduling concerns its Subjects and its Connections as a neutro-

sophic graph in a Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
1.2 A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Study 70
2.1 Scheduling concerns its Subjects and its Connections as a neutro-

sophic graph in a Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
2.2 A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Study 143
xii
CHAPTER 1
Initial Notions
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 91st manuscript and I
use prefix 91 as number before any labelling for items.
[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Regularity of Every Element to Function in the

Type of Domination in Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchGate 2022 (doi:
10.13140/RG.2.2.22861.10727).
Regularity of Every Element to Function in the Type of

Domination in Neutrosophic Graphs
1.1 Abstract
New setting is introduced to study k-number-dominating number and neutro-
sophic k-number-dominating number arising from k-number-dominated vertices
in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Minimum number of
k-number-dominated vertices, is a number which is representative based on
those vertices. Minimum neutrosophic number of k-number-dominated vertices
corresponded to k-number-dominating set is called neutrosophic k-number-
dominating number. Forming sets from k-number-dominated vertices to figure
out different types of number of vertices in the sets from k-number-dominated
sets in the terms of minimum number of vertices to get minimum number to as-
sign to neutrosophic graphs is key type of approach to have these notions namely
k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic k-number-dominating number
arising from k-number-dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to
neutrosophic graphs. Two numbers and one set are assigned to a neutrosophic
graph, are obtained but now both settings lead to approach is on demand which
is to compute and to find representatives of sets having smallest number of k-
number-dominated vertices from different types of sets in the terms of minimum
number and minimum neutrosophic number forming it to get minimum number
to assign to a neutrosophic graph. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic
graph. Then for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk
1
1. Initial Notions
by N k (N T G); for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk

vertex n in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S
such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic
vertices, S is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating set. The minimum neut-
rosophic cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is called neutrosophic
k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by Nnk (N T G). As concluding
sections “Setting of k-number-dominating number,” and “Setting of neutro-
sophic k-number-dominating number,” for introduced results and used classes.
This approach facilitates identifying sets which form k-number-dominating
In both settings, some classes of well-known neutrosophic graphs are studied.
Some clarifications for each result and each definition are provided. The car-
dinality of set of k-number-dominated vertices and neutrosophic cardinality
of set of k-number-dominated vertices corresponded to k-number-dominating
set have eligibility to define k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic
k-number-dominating number but different types of set of k-number-dominated
vertices to define k-number-dominating sets. Some results get more frameworks
and more perspectives about these definitions. The way in that, different types
of set of k-number-dominated vertices in the terms of minimum number to
assign to neutrosophic graphs, opens the way to do some approaches. These
notions are applied into neutrosophic graphs as individuals but not family of
them as drawbacks for these notions. Finding special neutrosophic graphs which
are well-known, is an open way to pursue this study. Neutrosophic k-number-
dominating notion is applied to different settings and classes of neutrosophic
graphs. Some problems are proposed to pursue this study. Basic familiarities
with graph theory and neutrosophic graph theory are proposed for this article.
Keywords: k-number-dominating Number, Neutrosophic k-number-
dominating Number, Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs

AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45
1.2 Background
Fuzzy set in Ref. [Ref22] by Zadeh (1965), intuitionistic fuzzy sets in Ref.
[Ref3] by Atanassov (1986), a first step to a theory of the intuitionistic fuzzy
graphs in Ref. [Ref17] by Shannon and Atanassov (1994), a unifying field
in logics neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic, rehoboth in
Ref. [Ref18] by Smarandache (1998), single-valued neutrosophic sets in Ref.
[Ref20] by Wang et al. (2010), single-valued neutrosophic graphs in Ref.
[Ref6] by Broumi et al. (2016), operations on single-valued neutrosophic
graphs in Ref. [Ref1] by Akram and Shahzadi (2017), neutrosophic soft graphs
2
1.3. Motivation and Contributions
in Ref. [Ref16] by Shah and Hussain (2016), bounds on the average and
minimum attendance in preference-based activity scheduling in Ref. [Ref2]
by Aronshtam and Ilani (2022), investigating the recoverable robust single
machine scheduling problem under interval uncertainty in Ref. [Ref5] by
Bold and Goerigk (2022), k-domination and total k-domination numbers in
catacondensed hexagonal systems in Ref. [Ref4] by S. Bermudo et al. (2022),
the minus total k-domination numbers in graphs in Ref. [Ref7] by J. Dayap
et al. (2022), weighted top-k dominating queries on highly incomplete data in
Ref. [Ref8] by H.M.A. Fattah et al. (2022), a note on the k-tuple domination
number of graphs in Ref. [Ref13] by A.C. Martinez (2022), improved bounds
on the k-tuple (Roman) domination number of a graph in Ref. [Ref14] by A.A.
Noor et al. (2022), a restart local search algorithm with relaxed configuration
checking strategy for the minimum k-dominating set problem in Ref. [Ref15]
by L. Ruizhi et al. (2022), Zeroth-order general Randić index of trees with
given distance k-domination number in Ref. [Ref19] by T. Vetrik et al. (2022),
top-k dominating queries on incomplete large dataset in graphs in Ref. [Ref21]
by J.M.T. Wu et al. (2012), dimension and coloring alongside domination in
neutrosophic hypergraphs in Ref. [Ref10] by Henry Garrett (2022), three
types of neutrosophic alliances based on connectedness and (strong) edges in
Ref. [Ref12] by Henry Garrett (2022), properties of SuperHyperGraph and
neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in Ref. [Ref11] by Henry Garrett (2022), are
studied. Also, some studies and researches about neutrosophic graphs, are
proposed as a book in Ref. [Ref9] by Henry Garrett (2022).
In this section, I use two subsections to illustrate a perspective about the
background of this study.
1.3 Motivation and Contributions

In this study, there’s an idea which could be considered as a motivation.
Question 1.3.1. Is it possible to use mixed versions of ideas concerning “k-
number-dominating number”, “neutrosophic k-number-dominating number” and
“Neutrosophic Graph” to define some notions which are applied to neutrosophic
graphs?
It’s motivation to find notions to use in any classes of neutrosophic graphs.
Real-world applications about time table and scheduling are another thoughts
which lead to be considered as motivation. Having connection amid two
vertices have key roles to assign k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic
k-number-dominating number arising from k-number-dominated vertices in
neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Thus they’re used to
define new ideas which conclude to the structure of k-number-dominating
The concept of having smallest number of k-number-dominated vertices in the
terms of crisp setting and in the terms of neutrosophic setting inspires us to
study the behavior of all k-number-dominated vertices in the way that, some
types of numbers, k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic k-number-
dominating number arising from k-number-dominated vertices in neutrosophic
graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs, are the cases of study in the setting of
3
1. Initial Notions
individuals. In both settings, corresponded numbers conclude the discussion.

Also, there are some avenues to extend these notions.
The framework of this study is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In subsection “Preliminaries”, new
notions of k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number arising from k-number-dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs
assigned to neutrosophic graphs, are highlighted, are introduced and are clarified
as individuals. In section “Preliminaries”, minimum number of k-number-
dominated vertices, is a number which is representative based on those vertices,
have the key role in this way. General results are obtained and also, the results
about the basic notions of k-number-dominating number and neutrosophic
k-number-dominating number arising from k-number-dominated vertices in
neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs, are elicited. Some
classes of neutrosophic graphs are studied in the terms of k-number-dominating
dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs, in
section “Setting of k-number-dominating number,” as individuals. In section
“Setting of k-number-dominating number,” k-number-dominating number is
applied into individuals. As concluding results, there are some statements,
remarks, examples and clarifications about some classes of neutrosophic
graphs namely path-neutrosophic graphs, cycle-neutrosophic graphs, complete-
neutrosophic graphs, star-neutrosophic graphs, complete-bipartite-neutrosophic
graphs, complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graphs, and wheel-neutrosophic graphs.
The clarifications are also presented in both sections “Setting of k-number-
dominating number,” and “Setting of neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number,” for introduced results and used classes. In section “Applications
in Time Table and Scheduling”, two applications are posed for quasi-complete
and complete notions, namely complete-neutrosophic graphs and complete-t-
partite-neutrosophic graphs concerning time table and scheduling when the
suspicions are about choosing some subjects and the mentioned models are
considered as individual. In section “Open Problems”, some problems and
questions for further studies are proposed. In section “Conclusion and Closing
Remarks”, gentle discussion about results and applications is featured. In section
“Conclusion and Closing Remarks”, a brief overview concerning advantages and
limitations of this study alongside conclusions is formed.
1.4 Preliminaries
In this subsection, basic material which is used in this article, is presented.
Also, new ideas and their clarifications are elicited.
Basic idea is about the model which is used. First definition introduces basic
model.
Definition 1.4.1. (Graph).
G = (V, E) is called a graph if V is a set of objects and E is a subset of V × V
(E is a set of 2-subsets of V ) where V is called vertex set and E is called
edge set. Every two vertices have been corresponded to at most one edge.
Neutrosophic graph is the foundation of results in this paper which is defined
as follows. Also, some related notions are demonstrated.
4
1.4. Preliminaries
Definition 1.4.2. (Neutrosophic Graph And Its Special Case).

N T G = (V, E, σ = (σ1 , σ2 , σ3 ), µ = (µ1 , µ2 , µ3 )) is called a neutrosophic
graph if it’s graph, σi : V → [0, 1], and µi : E → [0, 1]. We add one condition
on it and we use special case of neutrosophic graph but with same name. The
added condition is as follows, for every vi vj ∈ E,
µ(vi vj ) ≤ σ(vi ) ∧ σ(vj ).
(i) : σ is called neutrosophic vertex set.
(ii) : µ is called neutrosophic edge set.
(iii) : |V | is called order of NTG and it’s denoted by O(N T G).

P P3
(iv) : v∈V i=1 σi (v) is called neutrosophic order of NTG and it’s denoted
by On (N T G).
(v) : |E| is called size of NTG and it’s denoted by S(N T G).
P P3
(vi) : e∈E i=1 µi (e) is called neutrosophic size of NTG and it’s denoted
by Sn (N T G).
Some classes of well-known neutrosophic graphs are defined. These classes

of neutrosophic graphs are used to form this study and the most results are
about them.
Definition 1.4.3. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then
(i) : a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is called path

where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N T G) − 1;
V
(ii) : strength of path P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is i=0,··· ,O(N T G)−1 µ(xi xi+1 );
(iii) : connectedness amid vertices x0 and xt is

_ ^
µ∞ (x0 , xt ) = µ(xi xi+1 );
P :x0 ,x1 ,··· ,xt i=0,··· ,t−1
(iv) : a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) , x0 is called

cycle where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N T G) − 1, xO(N T G) x0 ∈ E
V there are two edges xy and uv such that µ(xy) = µ(uv) =
and
i=0,1,··· ,n−1 µ(vi vi+1 );
(v) : it’s t-partite where V is partitioned to t parts, V1s1 , V2s2 , · · · , Vtst and
s
the edge xy implies x ∈ Visi and y ∈ Vj j where i 6= j. If it’s complete,
then it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt where σi is σ on Visi instead V which
mean x 6∈ Vi induces σi (x) = 0. Also, |Vjsi | = si ;
(vi) : t-partite is complete bipartite if t = 2, and it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 ;
(vii) : complete bipartite is star if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted by S1,σ2 ;
(viii) : a vertex in V is center if the vertex joins to all vertices of a cycle. Then
it’s wheel and it’s denoted by W1,σ2 ;
5
1. Initial Notions
(ix) : it’s complete where ∀uv ∈ V, µ(uv) = σ(u) ∧ σ(v);
(x) : it’s strong where ∀uv ∈ E, µ(uv) = σ(u) ∧ σ(v).
To make them concrete, I bring preliminaries of this article in two upcoming

definitions in other ways.
µ(vi vj ) ≤ σ(vi ) ∧ σ(vj ).
|V | is called order of NTG and it’s denoted by O(N T G). Σv∈V σ(v) is called
neutrosophic order of NTG and it’s denoted by On (N T G).
Definition 1.4.5. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then it’s
complete and denoted by CM T σ if ∀x, y ∈ V,xy ∈ E and µ(xy) = σ(x) ∧ σ(y);
a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is called path and
it’s denoted by P T H where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , n − 1; a sequence of
consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) , x0 is called cycle and denoted by
CY C where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , n − 1, xO(N VT G) x0 ∈ E and there are
two edges xy and uv such that µ(xy) = µ(uv) = i=0,1,··· ,n−1 µ(vi vi+1 ); it’s
t-partite where V is partitioned to t parts, V1s1 , V2s2 , · · · , Vtst and the edge xy
s
implies x ∈ Visi and y ∈ Vj j where i 6= j. If it’s complete, then it’s denoted
by CM T σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt where σi is σ on Visi instead V which mean x 6∈ Vi induces
σi (x) = 0. Also, |Vjsi | = si ; t-partite is complete bipartite if t = 2, and it’s
denoted by CM T σ1 ,σ2 ; complete bipartite is star if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted
by ST R1,σ2 ; a vertex in V is center if the vertex joins to all vertices of a cycle.
Then it’s wheel and it’s denoted by W HL1,σ2 .
Remark 1.4.6. Using notations which is mixed with literatures, are reviewed.
1.4.6.1. N T G = (V, E, σ = (σ1 , σ2 , σ3 ), µ = (µ1 , µ2 , µ3 )), O(N T G), and

On (N T G);
1.4.6.2. CM T σ , P T H, CY C, ST R1,σ2 , CM T σ1 ,σ2 , CM T σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt , and

W HL1,σ2 .
Definition 1.4.7. (k-number-dominating numbers).

Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then
(i) for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

dominate n. Let S be a set of neutrosophic vertices [a vertex alongside
triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every
neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices
s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then
the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-dominating set.
The minimum cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is called
k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G);
6
1.4. Preliminaries
(ii) for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called neutrosophic k-number-
dominating set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-
number-dominating sets is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number and it’s denoted by Nnk (N T G).
For convenient usages, the word neutrosophic which is used in previous

definition, won’t be used, usually. In next part, clarifications about main
definition are given. To avoid confusion and for convenient usages, examples are
usually used after every part and names are used in the way that, abbreviation,
simplicity, and summarization are the matters of mind.
Example 1.4.8. In Figure (1.1), a complete-neutrosophic graph is illustrated.
Some points are represented in follow-up items as follows.
(i) For given neutrosophic vertex, s, there’s an edge with other vertices;
(ii) in the setting of complete, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to

dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so as
dominating is different from k-number-dominating. Dominating number
and k-number-dominating number are the same if k = 1;
(iii) all k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating

number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .
For given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the
set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-dominating set. The
minimum cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is called k-
number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G) = k, k =
1, 2, . . . , O(N T G); and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ;
7
1. Initial Notions
(iv) there are some k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1,2,3,4 , {n2 }1,2,3,4 , {n3 }1,2,3,4 ,

{n4 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n3 }2,3,4 ,
{n1 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n3 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n4 }2,3,4 ,
{n3 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3,4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .
so as it’s possible to have one of them as a set corresponded to

neutrosophic k-number-dominating number so as neutrosophic cardinality
is characteristic;
(v) there are some k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
corresponded to k-number-dominating number as if there’s one k-number-

dominating set corresponded to neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number so as neutrosophic cardinality is the determiner;
(vi) all k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating

number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets
is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted
by Nnk (N T G) = 0.91 , 2.32 , 3.93 , 5.94 ; and corresponded to k-number-
dominating sets are
{n4 }1 , {n4 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n3 , n1 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .
8
1.5. Setting of k-number-dominating number
Figure 1.1: A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number. 91NTG1
1.5 Setting of k-number-dominating number

In this section, I provide some results in the setting of k-number-dominating
number. Some classes of neutrosophic graphs are chosen. Complete-neutrosophic
graph, path-neutrosophic graph, cycle-neutrosophic graph, star-neutrosophic
graph, bipartite-neutrosophic graph, t-partite-neutrosophic graph, and wheel-
neutrosophic graph, are both of cases of study and classes which the results are
about them.
Proposition 1.5.1. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a complete-neutrosophic graph.
Then
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(CM T σ ).
Thus,
N 1 (CM T σ ) = 1, N 2 (CM T σ ) = 2, . . . , N O(CM T σ ) (CM T σ ) = O(CM T σ ).
Proof. Suppose CM T σ : (V, E, σ, µ) is a complete-neutrosophic graph. By

CM T σ : (V, E, σ, µ) is a complete-neutrosophic graph, all vertices are connected
to each other. So there’s one edge between two vertices. In the setting of
complete, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating number
dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so as dominating is different
from k-number-dominating. Dominating number and k-number-dominating
number are the same if k = 1. All k-number-dominating sets corresponded to
k-number-dominating number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 , . . . , {nO(CM T σ )−2 }1 , {nO(CM T σ )−1 }1 , {nO(CM T σ ) }1 ,

{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n4 }2 , . . . , {n1 , nO(CM T σ )−1 }2 , {n1 , nO(CM T σ ) }2 , . . . ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , . . . , {n1 , n2 , nO(CM T σ )−1 }3 , {n1 , n2 , nO(CM T σ ) }3 , . . . ,
...
{n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(CM T σ ) }O(CM T σ ) .

dominate n. Let S be a set of neutrosophic vertices [a vertex alongside triple
pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic vertex
n in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that
9
1. Initial Notions
s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S

is called k-number-dominating set. The minimum cardinality between all k-
by
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(CM T σ ).
Thus,
N 1 (CM T σ ) = 1, N 2 (CM T σ ) = 2, . . . , N O(CM T σ ) (CM T σ ) = O(CM T σ );
and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
...
{n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(CM T σ ) }O(CM T σ ) .
Thus
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(CM T σ ).
Thus,
N 1 (CM T σ ) = 1, N 2 (CM T σ ) = 2, . . . , N O(CM T σ ) (CM T σ ) = O(CM T σ ).

Then k-number-dominating number isn’t equal to dominating number where
k > 1.
Then the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number is O(CM T σ ) choose k.
Then the number of k-number-dominating sets is O(CM T σ ) choose k plus
O(CM T σ ) choose k − 1 plus O(CM T σ ) choose k − 2 plus . . . plus O(CM T σ )
choose 1.
The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. A complete-
neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply the
definitions on it. To make it more clear, next part gives one special case to
apply definitions and results on it. Some items are devised to make more sense
about new notions. A complete-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result
and it’s studied to apply the definitions on it, too.
10

number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (CM T σ ) = k, k =
1, 2, . . . , O(CM T σ ); and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ;
{n1 }1,2,3,4 , {n2 }1,2,3,4 , {n3 }1,2,3,4 ,

{n4 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n3 }2,3,4 ,
{n1 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n3 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n4 }2,3,4 ,
{n3 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3,4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

is characteristic;
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,

11
1. Initial Notions


number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

by Nnk (CM T σ ) = 0.91 , 2.32 , 3.93 , 5.94 ; and corresponded to k-number-
dominating sets are
{n4 }1 , {n4 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n3 , n1 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .
Another class of neutrosophic graphs is addressed to path-neutrosophic

graph.
Proposition 1.5.6. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a path-neutrosophic graph. Then
O(P T H)
N 1 (P T H) = b c.
3
O(P T H)
N 2 (P T H) = b c.
2
k ≤ 2.
Proof. Suppose P T H : (V, E, σ, µ) is a path-neutrosophic graph. Let

n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(P T H) be a path-neutrosophic graph. For given two vertices, x and
12
y, there’s one path from x to y. In the setting of path, a vertex of dominating

set corresponded to dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-
dominate in the setting of dominating. All minimal k-number-dominating sets
corresponded to k-number-dominating number are
{n1 , n4 , . . .}1b O(P T H) c , {n2 , n5 , . . .}1b O(P T H) c , {n2 , n4 , . . .}1b O(P T H) c , . . . .

3 3 3
{n1 , nO(P T H) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

O(P T H) , {n1 , nO(P T H) , n2 , n4 , . . .} O(P T H) , . . . .
b 2 c b 2 c

n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such
by
O(P T H)
N 1 (P T H) = b c;
3
O(P T H)
N 2 (P T H) = b c;
2
k ≤ 2;

3 3 3
{n1 , nO(P T H) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

b 2 c b 2 c
Thus
O(P T H)
N 1 (P T H) = b c.
3
O(P T H)
N 2 (P T H) = b c.
2
k ≤ 2.

Proposition 1.5.7. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a path-neutrosophic graph. If k

isn’t equal to one, then all leaves belong k-number-dominating sets corresponded
to k-number-dominating number.
Proposition 1.5.8. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a path-neutrosophic graph. If at
least one leaf doesn’t belong k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number, then k is equal to one.
Example 1.5.9. There are two sections for clarifications.
(a) In Figure (1.3), an odd-path-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some
points are represented in follow-up items as follows.
(i) For given neutrosophic vertex, s, there’s only one path with other
vertices;
13
1. Initial Notions
(ii) in the setting of path, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to

dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate in
the setting of dominating;
(iii) all minimal k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number are
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 .
For given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-

number-dominate n. Let S be a set of neutrosophic vertices [a vertex
alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.].
If for every neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a
neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-
number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called
k-number-dominating set. The minimum cardinality between all
k-number-dominating sets is called k-number-dominating number
and it’s denoted by N k (P T H) = k + 1, k = 1, 2; and corresponded
to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 ;
(iv) there are thirteen k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n2 }1,2 ,
so as it’s possible to have one of them as a set corresponded

to neutrosophic k-number-dominating number so as neutrosophic
cardinality is characteristic;
(v) there are four k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 ,
corresponded to k-number-dominating number as if there’s one

k-number-dominating set corresponded to neutrosophic k-number-
dominating number so as neutrosophic cardinality is the determiner;
(vi) all minimal k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1,2 .

14
alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for

every neutrosophic vertex n in V \S, there are at least a neutrosophic
vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate
n, then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-
number and it’s denoted by Nn1 (P T H) = 2.6, Nn2 (P T H) = 3.3; and
corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 .
(b) In Figure (1.4), an even-path-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some

vertices;
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 .

k-number-dominating set. The minimum cardinality between all k-
number-dominating sets is called k-number-dominating number and
it’s denoted by N 1 (P T H) = 2, N 2 (P T H) = 4; and corresponded
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 ;
(iv) there are twenty k-number-dominating sets
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n6 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 , n1 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 ,

15
1. Initial Notions

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 .

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .
Proposition 1.5.10. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a cycle-neutrosophic graph where

O(CY C) ≥ 3. Then
O(CY C)
N 1 (CY C) = b c.
3
O(CY C)
N 2 (CY C) = b c.
2
k ≤ 2.
16

Proof. Suppose CY C : (V, E, σ, µ) is a cycle-neutrosophic graph. For given two

vertices, x and y, there are only two paths with distinct edges from x to y. Let
n1 , n2 , · · · , nO(CY C)−1 , nO(CY C) , n1
be a cycle-neutrosophic graph CY C : (V, E, σ, µ). In the setting of cycle, a
vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating number dominates as
if it doesn’t k-number-dominate in the setting of dominating. All minimal
k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating number are
{n1 , n4 , . . .}1b O(CY C) c , {n2 , n5 , . . .}1b O(CY C) c , {n2 , n4 , . . .}1b O(CY C) c , . . . .
3 3 3
{n1 , nO(CY C) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

O(CY C) , {n1 , nO(CY C) , n2 , n4 , . . .} O(CY C) , . . . .
b 2 c b 2 c

by
O(CY C)
N 1 (CY C) = b c;
3
O(CY C)
N 2 (CY C) = b c;
2
k ≤ 2;
3 3 3
{n1 , nO(CY C) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

b 2 c b 2 c
Thus
O(CY C)
N 1 (CY C) = b c.
3
17
1. Initial Notions
O(CY C)
N 2 (CY C) = b c.
2
k ≤ 2.

The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. An odd-cycle-

about new notions. An even-cycle-neutrosophic graph is related to previous
result and it’s studied to apply the definitions on it, too.
(a) In Figure (1.5), an even-cycle-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some

vertices;
(ii) in the setting of cycle, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,

{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 .

and it’s denoted by N k (CY C) = k + 1, k = 1, 2; and corresponded
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,

{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 ;
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n6 }1,2 ,
18
{n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 , n1 }1,2 , . . . ,

(v) there are five k-number-dominating sets
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,

{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,

{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 .

number and it’s denoted by Nn1 (CY C) = 2.2, Nn2 (CY C) = 3.2, ;
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .
(b) In Figure (1.6), an odd-cycle-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some

vertices;
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n1 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 .

19
1. Initial Notions

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n1 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ;
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n2 }1,2 ,

(v) there are twenty-three k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n3 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n5 , n1 }1,2 , {n4 , n5 , n1 , n2 }1,2 ,
{n5 , n1 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n1 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 .
20



number and it’s denoted by Nn1 (CY C) = 2.8, Nn2 (CY C) = 4.8; and
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 .
Proposition 1.5.12. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a star-neutrosophic graph with

center c. Then
N 1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 1.
N O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1.
k = 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1.
21
1. Initial Notions
Proof. Suppose ST R1,σ2 : (V, E, σ, µ) is a star-neutrosophic graph. An edge

always has center, c, as one of its endpoints where nO(ST R1,σ2 ) = c. All paths
have one as their lengths, forever. In the setting of star, a vertex of dominating
{nO(ST R1,σ2 ) }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , . . . , nO(ST R1,σ2 )−1 }1,O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 .

by
N 1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 1;
N O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;

k = 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;
Thus
N 1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 1.

k = 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1.

Proposition 1.5.13. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a star-neutrosophic graph. Then

k-number-dominating number isn’t equal to dominating number where k 6= 1.
center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-dominating sets is 2O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 where k = 1;
(ii) the number of k-number-dominating sets is one where k 6= 1.

center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-

dominating number is one where k = 1;
(ii) the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-

dominating number is one where k 6= 1.
22
The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. A star-neutrosophic

graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply the definitions on it.
To make it more clear, next part gives one special case to apply definitions and
results on it. Some items are devised to make more sense about new notions. A
star-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply
the definitions on it, too.
Example 1.5.16. There is one section for clarifications. In Figure (1.7), a
star-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some points are represented in follow-up
items as follows.
(i) For given two neutrosophic vertices, s and n1 , there’s only one path,
precisely one edge between them and there’s no path despite them;
(ii) in the setting of star, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to


{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 .

neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic
n, then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-dominating
set. The minimum cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is
called k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N 1 (ST R1,σ2 ) =
1, N 4 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 4, ; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 ;
(iv) there are seventeen k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 ,

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 ,

is characteristic;
(v) there are two k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 ,
23
1. Initial Notions



{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 .

neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic vertices
is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by
Nn1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 1.9, Nn4 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 5.7; and corresponded to k-number-
dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 .
Proposition 1.5.17. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a complete-bipartite-neutrosophic

graph which isn’t star-neutrosophic graph which means |V1 |, |V2 | ≥ 2. Then
N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 2k
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |}.
Proof. Suppose CM Cσ1 ,σ2 : (V, E, σ, µ) is a complete-bipartite-neutrosophic

graph. Every vertex in a part and another vertex in opposite part k-number-
dominates any given vertex. Assume same parity for same partition of vertex
set which means V1 has odd indexes and V2 has even indexes. In the setting
of complete-bipartite, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating
number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so as dominating is
24
different from k-number-dominating. All minimal k-number-dominating sets

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n6 }1 , . . . , {n1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) (nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 )}1 ,
{n2 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n7 }1 , . . . , {n2 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 (nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) )}1 ,
...
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) }1 ,
...,
{n1 , n3 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , . . . , {n1 , n3 , n2 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) (nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 )}1,2 ,
...,
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−3 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) }1,2 ,
...,
{ni+1 , ni+2 , ni+3 , . . . , ni+2 min{|V1 |,|V2 |} }1,2,...,min{|V1 |,|V2 |} .

by
N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 2k
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |}; and corresponded to k-number-dominating

sets are
...
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) }1 ,
...,
...,
...,
25
1. Initial Notions
Thus
N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 2k
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |}.

graph. Then k-number-dominating number isn’t equal to dominating number
where k 6= 1.
graph. Then the number of k-number-dominating sets is multiplying 2|V1 |+|V2 |−2k
by multiplying |V1 | choose k by |V2 | choose k.
graph. Then the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number is multiplying |V1 | choose k by |V2 | choose k.
bipartite-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to
apply the definitions on it. To make it more clear, next part gives one special
case to apply definitions and results on it. Some items are devised to make
more senses about new notions. A complete-bipartite-neutrosophic graph is
related to previous result and it’s studied to apply the definitions on it, too.
Example 1.5.21. There is one section for clarifications. In Figure (1.8),
a complete-bipartite-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some points are
represented in follow-up items as follows.
(i) For given two neutrosophic vertices, n and n0 , there is either one path
with length one or one path with length two between them;
(ii) in the setting of complete-bipartite, a vertex of dominating set correspon-

ded to dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate
so as dominating is different from k-number-dominating;

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .

k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) =
2k, k = 1, 2; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ;
26
(iv) there are nine k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n4 , n2 , n3 }1 ,

is characteristic;
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .

by Nn1 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 2.4, Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.8; and corresponded to
k-number-dominating sets are
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .
Proposition 1.5.22. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a complete-t-partite-neutrosophic

graph where t ≥ 3. Then
N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2k
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |, . . . , |Vt |}.
Proof. Suppose CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt : (V, E, σ, µ) is a complete-t-partite-

neutrosophic graph. Every vertex in a part is k-number-dominated by another
vertex in another part. Assume same parity for same partition of vertex set
which means Vi has odd indexes and Vj has even indexes. In the setting of
complete-t-partite, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating
27
1. Initial Notions


{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n6 }1 , . . . , {n1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) (nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1 )}1 ,
{n2 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n7 }1 , . . . , {n2 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1 (nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) )}1 ,
...
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) }1 ,
...,
{n1 , n3 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , . . . , {n1 , n3 , n2 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) (nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1 )}1,2 ,
...,
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−3 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) }1,2 ,
...,
{ni+1 , ni+2 , ni+3 , . . . , ni+2 min{|V1 |,|V2 |} }1,2,...,min{|V1 |,|V2 |,...,|Vt |} .
by
N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2k
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |, . . . , |Vt |}; and corresponded to k-number-
dominating sets are
28
...
...,
...,
...,
Thus
N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2k
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |, . . . , |Vt |}.

where k 6= 1.
graph. Then the number of k-number-dominating sets is multiplying 2|Vi |+|Vj |−2k
by the summation of multiplying |Vi | choose k by |Vj | choose k on i and j.
dominating number is the summation of multiplying |Vi | choose k by |Vj | choose
k on i and j.
The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. A complete-t-
partite-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply
the definitions on it. To make it more clear, next part gives one special case
to apply definitions and results on it. Some items are devised to make more
sense about new notions. A complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graph is related to
previous result and it’s studied to apply the definitions on it, too.
complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some points are represented
in follow-up items as follows.
(ii) in the setting of complete-t-partite, a vertex of dominating set correspon-

29
1. Initial Notions

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) =
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ;
(iv) there are eighteen k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n4 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 , n5 }1 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,

is characteristic;
(v) there are nine k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
30

{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .

Nn1 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2.4, Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.7; and corresponded to
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 .
Proposition 1.5.27. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a wheel-neutrosophic graph.

Then
N 1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 1.
O(W HL1,σ2 )
N 2 (W HL1,σ2 ) = b c.
2
O(W HL1,σ2 )
N 3 (W HL1,σ2 ) = b c + 1.
2
N O(W HL1,σ2 )−1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.
k = 1, 2, 3, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.
Proof. Suppose W HL1,σ2 : (V, E, σ, µ) is a wheel-neutrosophic graph. The

argument is elementary. All vertices of a cycle
n1 , n2 , n3 , · · · , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−3 , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 , n1
join to one vertex, c = nO(W HL1,σ2 ) . For every vertices, the minimum number
of edges amid them is either one or two because of center and the notion of
31
1. Initial Notions
neighbors. In the setting of wheel, a vertex of dominating set corresponded

to dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so as
dominating is different from k-number-dominating. All minimal k-number-
dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating number are
{nO(W HL1,σ2 ) }1 , {n2 , n4 , . . . , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 (nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 )}1,2 ,
{n3 , n5 , . . . , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 (nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 )}1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , . . . , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 (nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 )}1,2,3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , · · · , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−3 , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 }O(W HL1,σ2 )−1 .

by
N 1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 1.
O(W HL1,σ2 )
N 2 (W HL1,σ2 ) = b c.
2
O(W HL1,σ2 )
N 3 (W HL1,σ2 ) = b c + 1.
2
k = 1, 2, 3, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1;
{n3 , n5 , . . . , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 (nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 )}1,2 ,
Thus
N 1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 1.
O(W HL1,σ2 )
N 2 (W HL1,σ2 ) = b c.
2
O(W HL1,σ2 )
N 3 (W HL1,σ2 ) = b c + 1.
2
k = 1, 2, 3, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.

32

k > 1.
Proposition 1.5.29. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a wheel-partite-neutrosophic

dominating number is one where k = 1.

dominating number is one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.
The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. A wheel-

neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply
the definitions on it. To make it more clear, next part gives one special case to
about new notions. A wheel-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result

wheel-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some points are represented in follow-
up items as follows.
(i) For given two neutrosophic vertices, s and n1 , there’s only one edge
between them;
(ii) in the setting of wheel, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to

dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so
as dominating is different from k-number-dominating;

{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,

{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 .

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (W HL1,σ2 ) = k, k =
1, 2, 3, 4; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,

{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ;
33
1. Initial Notions

{n1 }1 , {n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2,3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2,3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ;
is characteristic;
(v) there are six k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ;
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 .
triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neut-
rosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic vertices
The minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-dominating
sets is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating number and it’s de-
noted by Nn1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 1.9, Nn2 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 2.4, Nn3 (W HL1,σ2 ) =
4.3, Nn4 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 5.3; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets
are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 .
1.6 Setting of neutrosophic k-number-dominating number

In this section, I provide some results in the setting of neutrosophic k-number-
dominating number. Some classes of neutrosophic graphs are chosen. Complete-
neutrosophic graph, path-neutrosophic graph, cycle-neutrosophic graph, star-
neutrosophic graph, bipartite-neutrosophic graph, t-partite-neutrosophic graph,
34
1.6. Setting of neutrosophic k-number-dominating number

and wheel-neutrosophic graph, are both of cases of study and classes which the
results are about them.

Then
k
3 X
X
Nnk (CM T σ ) = min σi (xj ), k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(CM T σ ).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xk }⊆V
i=1 j=1
Thus,
3
X 3 X
X 2
Nn1 (CM T σ ) = min σi (x), N 2 (CM T σ ) = min σi (xj ), . . . ,
x∈{x}⊆V xj ∈{x1 ,x2 }⊆V
i=1 i=1 j=1
3 O(CM
X XT σ )
NnO(CM T σ ) (CM T σ ) = min σi (xj ).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(CM T σ ) }⊆V
i=1 j=1

complete, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating number
dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so as dominating is different
from k-number-dominating. Dominating number and k-number-dominating
number are the same if k = 1. All k-number-dominating sets corresponded to
35
1. Initial Notions
k-number-dominating number are

...
{n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(CM T σ ) }O(CM T σ ) .
pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic
vertex n in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S
such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic
vertices, S is called k-number-dominating set. The minimum neutrosophic
number-dominating number and it’s denoted by
k
3 X
X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xk }⊆V
i=1 j=1
Thus,
3
X 3 X
X 2
x∈{x}⊆V xj ∈{x1 ,x2 }⊆V
i=1 i=1 j=1
3 O(CM
X XT σ )
NnO(CM T σ ) (CM T σ ) = min σi (xj );
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(CM T σ ) }⊆V
i=1 j=1

...
{n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(CM T σ ) }O(CM T σ ) .
Thus
k
3 X
X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xk }⊆V
i=1 j=1
Thus,
3
X 3 X
X 2
x∈{x}⊆V xj ∈{x1 ,x2 }⊆V
i=1 i=1 j=1
3 O(CM
X XT σ )
NnO(CM T σ ) (CM T σ ) = min σi (xj ).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(CM T σ ) }⊆V
i=1 j=1
36

k > 1.

Then the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number is O(CM T σ ) choose k.

Then the number of k-number-dominating sets is O(CM T σ ) choose k plus
O(CM T σ ) choose k − 1 plus O(CM T σ ) choose k − 2 plus . . . plus O(CM T σ )
choose 1.




number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (CM T σ ) = k, k =
37
1. Initial Notions
1, 2, . . . , O(CM T σ ); and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ;
{n1 }1,2,3,4 , {n2 }1,2,3,4 , {n3 }1,2,3,4 ,

{n4 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n3 }2,3,4 ,
{n1 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n3 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n4 }2,3,4 ,
{n3 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3,4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

is characteristic;
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,

number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

38


by Nnk (CM T σ ) = 0.91 , 2.32 , 3.93 , 5.94 ; and corresponded to k-number-
dominating sets are
{n4 }1 , {n4 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n3 , n1 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

graph.
O(P T H)
3 b X
X 3 c
Nn1 (P T H) = min σi (xj ).

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(P T H) }⊆V
b
3
c i=1 j=1
O(P T H)
3 b X
X 2 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(P T H) }⊆V
b
2
c i=1 j=1
k ≤ 2.

n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(P T H) be a path-neutrosophic graph. For given two vertices, x and
y, there’s one path from x to y. In the setting of path, a vertex of dominating

3 3 3
{n1 , nO(P T H) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

b 2 c b 2 c

vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in
S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic
39
1. Initial Notions

O(P T H)
3 b X
X 3 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(P T H) }⊆V
b
3
c i=1 j=1
O(P T H)
3 b X
X 2 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(P T H) }⊆V
b
2
c i=1 j=1
k ≤ 2;

3 3 3
{n1 , nO(P T H) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

b 2 c b 2 c
Thus
O(P T H)
3 b X
X 3 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(P T H) }⊆V
b
3
c i=1 j=1
O(P T H)
3 b X
X 2 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(P T H) }⊆V
b
2
c i=1 j=1
k ≤ 2.

isn’t equal to one, then all leaves belong k-number-dominating sets corresponded
to k-number-dominating number.
least one leaf doesn’t belong k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number, then k is equal to one.

vertices;
40

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 .

and it’s denoted by N k (P T H) = k + 1, k = 1, 2; and corresponded
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 ;
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n2 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1,2 .

41
1. Initial Notions

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 }1,2 .

vertices;
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 .

k-number-dominating set. The minimum cardinality between all k-
number-dominating sets is called k-number-dominating number and
it’s denoted by N 1 (P T H) = 2, N 2 (P T H) = 4; and corresponded
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 ;
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n6 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 , n1 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 ,

42


{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n6 , n2 , n4 }1,2 .
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n6 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .

O(CY C) ≥ 3. Then
O(CY C)
3 b X
X 3 c
Nn1 (CY C) = min σi (xj ).

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(CY C) }⊆V
b
3
c i=1 j=1
O(CY C)
3 b X
X 2 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(CY C) }⊆V
b
2
c i=1 j=1
43
1. Initial Notions

k ≤ 2.

n1 , n2 , · · · , nO(CY C)−1 , nO(CY C) , n1

vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating number dominates as
if it doesn’t k-number-dominate in the setting of dominating. All minimal
k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating number are

3 3 3
{n1 , nO(CY C) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

b 2 c b 2 c

O(CY C)
3 b X
X 3 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(CY C) }⊆V
b
3
c i=1 j=1
O(CY C)
3 b X
X 2 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(CY C) }⊆V
b
2
c i=1 j=1
k ≤ 2;
44

3 3 3
{n1 , nO(CY C) , n3 , . . .}1,2 1,2

b 2 c b 2 c
Thus
O(CY C)
3 b X
X 3 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(CY C) }⊆V
b
3
c i=1 j=1
O(CY C)
3 b X
X 2 c

xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(CY C) }⊆V
b
2
c i=1 j=1
k ≤ 2.

vertices;
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 .
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 ;
45
1. Initial Notions
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n6 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n6 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n1 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n6 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 , n1 }1,2 , . . . ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,

{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 }1 , {n3 , n6 }1 ,

{n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n6 }1,2 .

number and it’s denoted by Nn1 (CY C) = 2.2, Nn2 (CY C) = 3.2, ;
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .

vertices;
46

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n1 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 .
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n1 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ;
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n2 }1,2 ,
(v) there are twenty-three k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n5 , n1 }1 ,
{n2 , n5 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n3 , n4 , n2 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n3 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n5 , n1 }1,2 , {n4 , n5 , n1 , n2 }1,2 ,
{n5 , n1 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,
47
1. Initial Notions


{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1 ,

{n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n1 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 .

number and it’s denoted by Nn1 (CY C) = 2.8, Nn2 (CY C) = 4.8; and
{n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 .

center c. Then
X 3
1
Nn (ST R1,σ2 ) = σi (c).
i=1
3 O(ST X
R1,σ2 )−1
O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
X
Nn (ST R1,σ2 ) = min σi (xj ).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(ST R1,σ )−1 }⊆V \{c}
2 i=1 j=1
k = 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1.

48

have one as their lengths, forever. In the setting of star, a vertex of dominating

3
X
Nn1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = σi (c).
i=1
3 O(ST X
R1,σ2 )−1
O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(ST R1,σ )−1 }⊆V \{c}
2 i=1 j=1
k = 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;
Thus
3
X
Nn1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = σi (c).
i=1
3 O(ST X
R1,σ2 )−1
O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(ST R1,σ )−1 }⊆V \{c}
2 i=1 j=1
49
1. Initial Notions
k = 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1.

k-number-dominating number isn’t equal to dominating number where k 6= 1.
center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-dominating sets is 2O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 where k = 1;
(ii) the number of k-number-dominating sets is one where k 6= 1.
center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number is one where k = 1;
(ii) the number of k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-
dominating number is one where k 6= 1.
items as follows.
(ii) in the setting of star, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 .
neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic
n, then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-dominating
set. The minimum cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is
called k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N 1 (ST R1,σ2 ) =
1, N 4 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 4, ; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 ;
50
(iv) there are seventeen k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 ,

{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n2 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 ,

is characteristic;
(v) there are two k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 ,

{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 .

Nn1 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 1.9, Nn4 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 5.7; and corresponded to k-number-
dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,4 .

3 X
X 2k
Nnk (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = min σi (xj )
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x2k }⊆V
i=1 j=1
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |}.

dominates any given vertex. Assume same parity for same partition of vertex
51
1. Initial Notions

set which means V1 has odd indexes and V2 has even indexes. In the setting
of complete-bipartite, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating
...
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) }1 ,
...,
...,
...,

3 X
X 2k
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x2k }⊆V
i=1 j=1
52
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |}; and corresponded to k-number-dominating

sets are
...
{nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 , nO(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) }1 ,
...,
...,
...,
Thus
3 X
X 2k
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x2k }⊆V
i=1 j=1
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |}.

where k 6= 1.
graph. Then the number of k-number-dominating sets is multiplying 2|V1 |+|V2 |−2k
by multiplying |V1 | choose k by |V2 | choose k.
dominating number is multiplying |V1 | choose k by |V2 | choose k.
53
1. Initial Notions
(ii) in the setting of complete-bipartite, a vertex of dominating set correspon-

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .

k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) =
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ;
(iv) there are nine k-number-dominating sets
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n4 , n2 , n3 }1 ,

is characteristic;
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n2 }1 ,

{n4 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .

54


by Nn1 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 2.4, Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.8; and corresponded to
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 .

graph where t ≥ 3. Then
3 X
X 2k
Nnk (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = min σi (xj )
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x2k }⊆V
i=1 j=1
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |, . . . , |Vt |}.

neutrosophic graph. Every vertex in a part is k-number-dominated by another
complete-t-partite, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to dominating
55
1. Initial Notions
...
...,
...,
...,

3 X
X 2k
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x2k }⊆V
i=1 j=1
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |, . . . , |Vt |}; and corresponded to k-number-

dominating sets are
...
...,
...,
...,
56
Thus
3 X
X 2k
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x2k }⊆V
i=1 j=1
where k = 1, 2, . . . , min{|V1 |, |V2 |, . . . , |Vt |}.

where k 6= 1.
graph. Then the number of k-number-dominating sets is multiplying 2|Vi |+|Vj |−2k
by the summation of multiplying |Vi | choose k by |Vj | choose k on i and j.
dominating number is the summation of multiplying |Vi | choose k by |Vj | choose
k on i and j.
The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. A complete-t-
partite-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply
the definitions on it. To make it more clear, next part gives one special case
to apply definitions and results on it. Some items are devised to make more
sense about new notions. A complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graph is related to
previous result and it’s studied to apply the definitions on it, too.
(ii) in the setting of complete-t-partite, a vertex of dominating set correspon-


{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .

57
1. Initial Notions

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) =
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ;
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n4 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 , n5 }1 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,

is characteristic;
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .

Nn1 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2.4, Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.7; and corresponded to
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 .
58

Proposition 1.6.27. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a wheel-neutrosophic graph where

c is the center. Then
3
X
Nn1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = σi (c).
i=1
O(W HL1,σ )
2 c
3 b
X 2
X
Nn2 (W HL1,σ2 ) = min σi (xj ).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(W HL1,σ ) }⊆V
b 2 c i=1 j=1
2
O(W HL1,σ )
2 c
3 b
X 2X X3
Nn3 (W HL1,σ2 ) = min σi (xj )+ σi (c).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(W HL1,σ ) }⊆V
b 2 c i=1 j=1 i=1
2
3 O(W HL 1,σ2 )−1

O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
X X
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = min σi (xj ).
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(W HL1,σ )−1 }⊆V \{c}
2 i=1 j=1
k = 1, 2, 3, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.

of edges amid them is either one or two because of center and the notion of
neighbors. In the setting of wheel, a vertex of dominating set corresponded
to dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t k-number-dominate so as
dominating is different from k-number-dominating. All minimal k-number-
59
1. Initial Notions
dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating number are
{n3 , n5 , . . . , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 (nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 )}1,2 ,

3
X
Nn1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = σi (c).
i=1
O(W HL1,σ )
2 c
3 b
X 2X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(W HL1,σ ) }⊆V
b 2 c i=1 j=1
2
O(W HL1,σ )
2 c
3 b
X 2 X 3
X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(W HL1,σ ) }⊆V
b 2 c i=1 j=1 i=1
2
3 O(W HL 1,σ2 )−1

O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
X X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(W HL1,σ )−1 }⊆V \{c}
2 i=1 j=1
k = 1, 2, 3, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1;
{n3 , n5 , . . . , nO(W HL1,σ2 )−2 (nO(W HL1,σ2 )−1 )}1,2 ,
Thus
3
X
Nn1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = σi (c).
i=1
O(W HL1,σ )
2 c
3 b
X 2X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(W HL1,σ ) }⊆V
b 2 c i=1 j=1
2
60
O(W HL1,σ )
2 c
3 b
X 2
X X3
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,x O(W HL1,σ ) }⊆V
b 2 c i=1 j=1 i=1
2
3 O(W HL 1,σ2 )−1

O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
X X
xj ∈{x1 ,x2 ,...,xO(W HL1,σ )−1 }⊆V \{c}
2 i=1 j=1
k = 1, 2, 3, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.


k > 1.
dominating number is one where k = 1.
dominating number is one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1.
The clarifications about results are in progress as follows. A wheel-
neutrosophic graph is related to previous result and it’s studied to apply
the definitions on it. To make it more clear, next part gives one special case to
about new notions. A wheel-neutrosophic graph is related to previous result
(i) For given two neutrosophic vertices, s and n1 , there’s only one edge
between them;
(ii) in the setting of wheel, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to

as dominating is different from k-number-dominating;

{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,

{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 .

61
1. Initial Notions

number-dominating number and it’s denoted by N k (W HL1,σ2 ) = k, k =
1, 2, 3, 4; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ;

{n1 }1 , {n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n5 }1 , {n3 , n4 }1 ,
{n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 }1,2,3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2,3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ;
is characteristic;
(v) there are six k-number-dominating sets
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ;
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n3 , n5 , n1 }1,2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 .
triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neut-
rosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least a neutrosophic vertices
The minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-dominating
sets is called neutrosophic k-number-dominating number and it’s de-
noted by Nn1 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 1.9, Nn2 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 2.4, Nn3 (W HL1,σ2 ) =
4.3, Nn4 (W HL1,σ2 ) = 5.3; and corresponded to k-number-dominating sets
are
{n1 }1 , {n2 , n4 }1,2 , {n2 , n4 , n1 }1,2,3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 .
62
1.7. Applications in Time Table and Scheduling

1.7 Applications in Time Table and Scheduling
In this section, two applications for time table and scheduling are provided where
the models are either complete models which mean complete connections are
formed as individual and family of complete models with common neutrosophic
vertex set or quasi-complete models which mean quasi-complete connections
are formed as individual and family of quasi-complete models with common
neutrosophic vertex set.
Designing the programs to achieve some goals is general approach to apply on
some issues to function properly. Separation has key role in the context of this
style. Separating the duration of work which are consecutive, is the matter and
it has importance to avoid mixing up.
Step 1. (Definition) Time table is an approach to get some attributes to do

the work fast and proper. The style of scheduling implies special attention
to the tasks which are consecutive.
Step 2. (Issue) Scheduling of program has faced with difficulties to differ amid
consecutive sections. Beyond that, sometimes sections are not the same.
Step 3. (Model) The situation is designed as a model. The model uses data to
assign every section and to assign to relation amid sections, three numbers
belong unit interval to state indeterminacy, possibilities and determinacy.
There’s one restriction in that, the numbers amid two sections are at least
the number of the relations amid them. Table (1.1), clarifies about the
assigned numbers to these situations.
63
1. Initial Notions
Table 1.1: Scheduling concerns its Subjects and its Connections as a neutrosophic
graph in a Model. 91tbl1
Sections of N T G n1 n2 · · · n5
Values (0.7, 0.9, 0.3) (0.4, 0.2, 0.8)· · · (0.4, 0.2, 0.8)
Connections of N T G E1 E2 · · · E6
Values (0.4, 0.2, 0.3) (0.5, 0.2, 0.3)· · · (0.3, 0.2, 0.3)

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number 91NTG20
1.8 Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its

k-number-dominating number and its neutrosophic
k-number-dominating number
Step 4. (Solution) The neutrosophic graph alongside its k-number-dominating

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number as model,
propose to use specific number. Every subject has connection with some
subjects. Thus the connection is applied as possible and the model
demonstrates quasi-full connections as quasi-possible. Using the notion of
strong on the connection amid subjects, causes the importance of subject
goes in the highest level such that the value amid two consecutive subjects,
is determined by those subjects. If the configuration is star, the number
is different. Also, it holds for other types such that complete, wheel,
path, and cycle. The collection of situations is another application of its
k-number-dominating number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating
number when the notion of family is applied in the way that all members
of family are from same classes of neutrosophic graphs. As follows, there
are five subjects which are represented as Figure (1.20). This model is
strong and even more it’s quasi-complete. And the study proposes using
specific number which is called its k-number-dominating number and its
neutrosophic k-number-dominating number. There are also some analyses
on other numbers in the way that, the clarification is gained about being
special number or not. Also, in the last part, there is one neutrosophic
64
1.8. Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its k-number-dominating
number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number
number to assign to this model and situation to compare them with same
situations to get more precise. Consider Figure (1.20). In Figure (1.20),
an complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some points are
(i) For given two neutrosophic vertices, n and n0 , there is either one
path with length one or one path with length two between them;
(ii) in the setting of complete-t-partite, a vertex of dominating set
corresponded to dominating number dominates as if it doesn’t
k-number-dominate so as dominating is different from k-number-
dominating;
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .
and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2k, k = 1, 2; and
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ;

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n4 , n2 , n3 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 , n5 }1 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2 ,
{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 ,
65
1. Initial Notions

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number 91NTG21

{n1 , n2 }1 , {n1 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n5 }1 ,

{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n3 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 ,
{n1 , n4 , n2 , n3 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 , {n1 , n4 , n3 , n5 }1,2 .

number-dominate n. Let S be a set of neutrosophic vertices [a
vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic
vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there
are at least a neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that
s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-dominate n, then the set of neutrosophic
vertices, S is called k-number-dominating set. The minimum neut-
rosophic cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is called
neutrosophic k-number-dominating number and it’s denoted by
Nn1 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 2.4, Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.7; and correspon-
ded to k-number-dominating sets are
{n4 , n2 }1 , {n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n2 , n5 }1,2 .
1.9 Case 2: Complete Model alongside its

Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its
k-number-dominating number and its neutrosophic
Step 4. (Solution) The neutrosophic graph alongside its k-number-dominating

number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number as model,
propose to use specific number. Every subject has connection with every
given subject in deemed way. Thus the connection applied as possible
and the model demonstrates full connections as possible between parts
but with different view where symmetry amid vertices and edges are the
66
1.9. Case 2: Complete Model alongside its Neutrosophic Graph in the
Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating number and its neutrosophic
matters. Using the notion of strong on the connection amid subjects,
causes the importance of subject goes in the highest level such that the
value amid two consecutive subjects, is determined by those subjects. If
the configuration is complete multipartite, the number is different. Also, it
holds for other types such that star, wheel, path, and cycle. The collection
of situations is another application of its k-number-dominating number
and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number when the notion of
family is applied in the way that all members of family are from same
classes of neutrosophic graphs. As follows, there are four subjects which
are represented in the formation of one model as Figure (1.21). This
model is neutrosophic strong as individual and even more it’s complete.
And the study proposes using specific number which is called its k-number-
dominating number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number
for this model. There are also some analyses on other numbers in the
way that, the clarification is gained about being special number or not.
Also, in the last part, there is one neutrosophic number to assign to these
models as individual. A model as a collection of situations to compare
them with another model as a collection of situations to get more precise.
Consider Figure (1.21). There is one section for clarifications.
as dominating is different from k-number-dominating. Dominating
number and k-number-dominating number are the same if k = 1;
number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

If for every neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least
and it’s denoted by N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = 1, 2, . . . , O(CM T σ ); and
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
67
1. Initial Notions
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ;
{n1 }1,2,3,4 , {n2 }1,2,3,4 , {n3 }1,2,3,4 ,

{n4 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n3 }2,3,4 ,
{n1 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n3 }2,3,4 , {n2 , n4 }2,3,4 ,
{n3 , n4 }2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3,4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,

number are
{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

{n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 ,
{n1 , n4 }2 , {n2 , n3 }2 , {n2 , n4 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

every neutrosophic vertex n in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic
number and it’s denoted by Nnk (CM T σ ) = 0.91 , 2.32 , 3.93 , 5.94 ; and
{n4 }1 , {n4 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n3 , n1 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .
68
1.10. Open Problems
1.10 Open Problems

In this section, some questions and problems are proposed to give some avenues
to pursue this study. The structures of the definitions and results give some
ideas to make new settings which are eligible to extend and to create new study.
Notion concerning its k-number-dominating number and its neutrosophic k-
number-dominating number are defined in neutrosophic graphs. Thus,
Question 1.10.1. Is it possible to use other types of its k-number-dominating
number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number?
Question 1.10.2. Are existed some connections amid different types of its k-
number-dominating number and its neutrosophic k-number-dominating number
in neutrosophic graphs?
Question 1.10.3. Is it possible to construct some classes of neutrosophic graphs
which have “nice” behavior?
Question 1.10.4. Which mathematical notions do make an independent study
to apply these types in neutrosophic graphs?
Problem 1.10.5. Which parameters are related to this parameter?
Problem 1.10.6. Which approaches do work to construct applications to create
independent study?
Problem 1.10.7. Which approaches do work to construct definitions which use
all definitions and the relations amid them instead of separate definitions to
create independent study?
1.11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks

In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The
drawbacks of this article are illustrated. Some benefits and advantages of this
study are highlighted.
This study uses two definitions concerning k-number-dominating number and
neutrosophic k-number-dominating number arising from k-number-dominated
vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Minimum
number of k-number-dominated vertices, is a number which is representative
based on those vertices. Minimum neutrosophic number of k-number-dominated
vertices corresponded to k-number-dominating set is called neutrosophic k-
number-dominating number. The connections of vertices which aren’t clarified
by minimum number of edges amid them differ them from each other and put
them in different categories to represent a number which is called k-number-
dominating number and neutrosophic k-number-dominating number arising from
k-number-dominated vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic
graphs. Further studies could be about changes in the settings to compare
these notions amid different settings of neutrosophic graphs theory. One way is
finding some relations amid all definitions of notions to make sensible definitions.
In Table (1.2), some limitations and advantages of this study are pointed out.
69
1. Initial Notions
Table 1.2: A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Study 91tbl
Advantages Limitations
1. k-number-dominating Number of Model 1. Connections amid Classes
2. Neutrosophic k-number-dominating Number of Model
3. Minimal k-number-dominating Sets 2. Study on Families
4. k-number-dominated Vertices amid all Vertices
5. Acting on All Vertices 3. Same Models in Family
70
Bibliography
Ref1 [1] M. Akram, and G. Shahzadi, “Operations on Single-Valued Neutrosophic

Graphs”, Journal of uncertain systems 11 (1) (2017) 1-26.
Ref2 [2] L. Aronshtam, and H. Ilani, “Bounds on the average and minimum at-
tendance in preference-based activity scheduling”, Discrete Applied Math-
ematics 306 (2022) 114-119. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2021.09.024.)
Ref3 [3] K. Atanassov, “Intuitionistic fuzzy sets”, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20 (1986) 87-96.
Ref4 [4] S. Bermudo et al., “k-domination and total k-domination numbers in cata-
condensed hexagonal systems”, Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
19 (7) (2022) 7138-7155. (https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2022337.)
Ref5 [5] M. Bold, and M. Goerigk, “Investigating the recoverable ro-
bust single machine scheduling problem under interval uncer-
tainty”, Discrete Applied Mathematics 313 (2022) 99-114. (ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2022.02.005.)
Ref6 [6] S. Broumi et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic graphs”, Journal of New
Theory 10 (2016) 86-101.
Ref7 [7] J. Dayap et al., “The minus total k-domination numbers in graphs”,
Discrete Mathematics, Algorithms and Applications 14 (5) (2022) 2150150.
(https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793830921501500.)
Ref8 [8] H.M.A. Fattah et al., “Weighted top-k dominating queries on highly
incomplete data”, Information Systems 107 (2022) 102008. (ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2022.102008.)
Ref9 [9] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-
publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grand-
Ref10 [10] Henry Garrett, “Dimension and Coloring alongside Domination in Neut-
rosophic Hypergraphs”, Preprints 2021, 2021120448 (doi: 10.20944/pre-
prints202112.0448.v1).
Ref11 [11] Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neut-
rosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Sys-
tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413).
71
Bibliography
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf).
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss_journal/vol49/iss1/34).
Ref12 [12] Henry Garrett, “Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Con-
nectedness and (Strong) Edges”, Preprints 2022, 2022010239 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202201.0239.v1).
Ref13 [13] A.C. Martinez, “A note on the k-tuple domination number
of graphs”, ARS MATHEMATICA CONTEMPORANEA (2022).
(https://doi.org/10.26493/1855-3974.2600.dcc.)
Ref14 [14] A.A. Noor et al., “Improved Bounds on the k-tuple (Roman) Domination
Number of a Graph”, Graphs and Combinatorics 38 (3) (2022) 1-7.
(https://doi.org/10.1007/s00373-022-02471-5.)
Ref15 [15] L. Ruizhi et al., “A restart local search algorithm with relaxed
configuration checking strategy for the minimum k-dominating
set problem”, Knowledge-Based Systems (2022) 109619. (ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109619.)
Ref16 [16] N. Shah, and A. Hussain, “Neutrosophic soft graphs”, Neutrosophic Set
and Systems 11 (2016) 31-44.
Ref17 [17] A. Shannon and K.T. Atanassov, “A first step to a theory of the
intuitionistic fuzzy graphs”, Proceeding of FUBEST (Lakov, D., Ed.)
Sofia (1994) 59-61.
Ref18 [18] F. Smarandache, “A Unifying field in logics neutrosophy: Neutrosophic
probability, set and logic, Rehoboth: ” American Research Press (1998).
Ref19 [19] T. Vetrik et al., “Zeroth-order general Randic index of trees
with given distance k-domination number”, Electronic Journal of
Graph Theory and Applications (EJGTA) 10 (1) (2022) 247-257.
(http://dx.doi.org/10.5614/ejgta.2022.10.1.17.)
Ref20 [20] H. Wang et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic sets”, Multispace and
Multistructure 4 (2010) 410-413.
Ref21 [21] J.M.T. Wu et al., “Top-k dominating queries on incomplete large
dataset”, The Journal of Supercomputing 78 (3) (2022) 3976-3997.
(https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-04005-x.)
Ref22 [22] L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets”, Information and Control 8 (1965) 338-354.
72
CHAPTER 2
Modified Notions
The following sections are cited as follows, which is my 92nd manuscript and I
use prefix 92 as number before any labelling for items.
[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Recognition of the Pattern for Vertices to Make

Dimension by Resolving in some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchG-
ate 2022 (doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27281.51046).
Recognition of the Pattern for Vertices to Make Dimension by

Resolving in some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs
2.1 Abstract
New setting is introduced to study k-number-resolving number and neutro-
sophic k-number-resolving number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in
neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Minimum number of
k-number-resolved vertices, is a number which is representative based on those
vertices. Minimum neutrosophic number of k-number-resolved vertices corres-
ponded to k-number-resolving set is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving
number. Forming sets from k-number-resolved vertices to figure out different
types of number of vertices in the sets from k-number-resolved sets in the terms of
minimum number of vertices to get minimum number to assign to neutrosophic
graphs is key type of approach to have these notions namely k-number-resolving
number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving number arising from k-number-
resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Two
numbers and one set are assigned to a neutrosophic graph, are obtained but now
both settings lead to approach is on demand which is to compute and to find
representatives of sets having smallest number of k-number-resolved vertices
from different types of sets in the terms of minimum number and minimum neut-
rosophic number forming it to get minimum number to assign to a neutrosophic
graph. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then for given vertices
n and n0 if d(s1 , n) 6= d(s1 , n0 ), d(s2 , n) 6= d(s2 , n0 ), . . . , d(sk , n) 6= d(sk , n0 ),
then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 . Let S be a set of neutrosophic
vertices [a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.].
If for every neutrosophic vertices n and n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutro-
sophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n
and n0 , then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-resolving
set. The minimum cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called
73
2. Modified Notions
k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G); for given vertices n

[a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for
every neutrosophic vertices n and n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic ver-
tices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 , then
the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving
set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-resolving
sets is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
Nnk (N T G). As concluding results, there are some statements, remarks, ex-
amples and clarifications about some classes of neutrosophic graphs namely path-
neutrosophic graphs, cycle-neutrosophic graphs, complete-neutrosophic graphs,
star-neutrosophic graphs, complete-bipartite-neutrosophic graphs, complete-t-
partite-neutrosophic graphs, and wheel-neutrosophic graphs. The clarifications
are also presented in both sections “Setting of k-number-resolving number,” and
“Setting of neutrosophic k-number-resolving number,” for introduced results and
used classes. This approach facilitates identifying sets which form k-number-
resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving number arising from
k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic
graphs. In both settings, some classes of well-known neutrosophic graphs are
studied. Some clarifications for each result and each definition are provided.
The cardinality of set of k-number-resolved vertices and neutrosophic cardinality
of set of k-number-resolved vertices corresponded to k-number-resolving set have
eligibility to define k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number but different types of set of k-number-resolved vertices to
define k-number-resolving sets. Some results get more frameworks and more
perspectives about these definitions. The way in that, different types of set of
k-number-resolved vertices in the terms of minimum number to assign to neutro-
sophic graphs, opens the way to do some approaches. These notions are applied
into neutrosophic graphs as individuals but not family of them as drawbacks
for these notions. Finding special neutrosophic graphs which are well-known, is
an open way to pursue this study. Neutrosophic k-number-resolving notion is
applied to different settings and classes of neutrosophic graphs. Some problems
are proposed to pursue this study. Basic familiarities with graph theory and
neutrosophic graph theory are proposed for this article.
Keywords: k-number-resolving Number, Neutrosophic k-number-resolving
Number, Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs

AMS Subject Classification: 05C17, 05C22, 05E45
2.2 Background
Fuzzy set in Ref. [Ref22] by Zadeh (1965), intuitionistic fuzzy sets in Ref.
[Ref3] by Atanassov (1986), a first step to a theory of the intuitionistic fuzzy
graphs in Ref. [Ref18] by Shannon and Atanassov (1994), a unifying field
in logics neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic, rehoboth in
Ref. [Ref19] by Smarandache (1998), single-valued neutrosophic sets in Ref.
[Ref20] by Wang et al. (2010), single-valued neutrosophic graphs in Ref.
[Ref6] by Broumi et al. (2016), operations on single-valued neutrosophic
74
2.3. Motivation and Contributions
graphs in Ref. [Ref1] by Akram and Shahzadi (2017), neutrosophic soft graphs
in Ref. [Ref17] by Shah and Hussain (2016), bounds on the average and
minimum attendance in preference-based activity scheduling in Ref. [Ref2] by
Aronshtam and Ilani (2022), investigating the recoverable robust single machine
scheduling problem under interval uncertainty in Ref. [Ref5] by Bold and
Goerigk (2022), error-correcting codes from k-resolving sets in Ref. [Ref4] by
R.F. Bold, and I.G. Yero (2016), restrained 2-resolving dominating sets in the
join, corona and lexicographic product of two graphs in Ref. [Ref7] by .M.
Cabaro, and H. Rara (2022), restrained 2-resolving sets in the join, corona and
lexicographic product of two graphs in Ref. [Ref8] by J.M. Cabaro, and H.
Rara (2022), on 2-resolving dominating sets in the join, corona and lexicographic
product of two graphs in Ref. [Ref9] by J.M. Cabaro, and H. Rara (2022),
on 2-resolving sets in the join and corona of graphs in Ref. [Ref10] by J.M.
Cabaro, and H. Rara (2021), 2-metric dimension of cartesian product of graphs
in Ref. [Ref11] by K.N. Geetha, and B. Sooryanarayana (2017), on 2-metric
resolvability in rotationally-symmetric graphs in Ref. [Ref16] by B. Humera
et al. (2021), the distance 2-resolving domination number of graphs in Ref.
[Ref21] by D.A.R. Wardani et al. (2021), three types of neutrosophic alliances
based on connectedness and (strong) edges in Ref. [Ref15] by Henry Garrett
(2022), properties of SuperHyperGraph and neutrosophic SuperHyperGraph in
Ref. [Ref14] by Henry Garrett (2022), are studied. Also, some studies and
researches about neutrosophic graphs, are proposed as books in Ref. [Ref12]
by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar and has more
than 300 readers in Scribd; in Ref. [Ref13] by Henry Garrett (2022) which is
indexed by Google Scholar and has more than 1000 readers in Scribd.
In this section, I use two subsections to illustrate a perspective about the
background of this study.
2.3 Motivation and Contributions

In this study, there’s an idea which could be considered as a motivation.
Question 2.3.1. Is it possible to use mixed versions of ideas concerning “k-
number-resolving number”, “neutrosophic k-number-resolving number” and
“Neutrosophic Graph” to define some notions which are applied to neutrosophic
graphs?
It’s motivation to find notions to use in any classes of neutrosophic graphs.
Real-world applications about time table and scheduling are another thoughts
which lead to be considered as motivation. Having connection amid two vertices
have key roles to assign k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic
graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Thus they’re used to define new
ideas which conclude to the structure of k-number-resolving number and
neutrosophic k-number-resolving number arising from k-number-resolved
vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. The concept
of having smallest number of k-number-resolved vertices in the terms of crisp
setting and in the terms of neutrosophic setting inspires us to study the behavior
of all k-number-resolved vertices in the way that, some types of numbers, k-
number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving number arising
75
2. Modified Notions
from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic

graphs, are the cases of study in the setting of individuals. In both settings,
corresponded numbers conclude the discussion. Also, there are some avenues to
extend these notions.
The framework of this study is as follows. In the beginning, I introduce basic
definitions to clarify about preliminaries. In subsection “Preliminaries”, new
notions of k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving
number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned
to neutrosophic graphs, are highlighted, are introduced and are clarified as
individuals. In section “Preliminaries”, minimum number of k-number-resolved
vertices, is a number which is representative based on those vertices, have the key
role in this way. General results are obtained and also, the results about the basic
notions of k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-resolving
number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned
to neutrosophic graphs, are elicited. Some classes of neutrosophic graphs are
studied in the terms of k-number-resolving number and neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number arising from k-number-resolved vertices in neutrosophic
graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs, in section “Setting of k-number-
resolving number,” as individuals. In section “Setting of k-number-resolving
number,” k-number-resolving number is applied into individuals. As concluding
sections “Setting of k-number-resolving number,” and “Setting of neutrosophic
k-number-resolving number,” for introduced results and used classes. In section
“Applications in Time Table and Scheduling”, two applications are posed for
quasi-complete and complete notions, namely complete-neutrosophic graphs and
complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graphs concerning time table and scheduling
when the suspicions are about choosing some subjects and the mentioned models
are considered as individual. In section “Open Problems”, some problems and
questions for further studies are proposed. In section “Conclusion and Closing
Remarks”, gentle discussion about results and applications is featured. In section
“Conclusion and Closing Remarks”, a brief overview concerning advantages and
limitations of this study alongside conclusions is formed.
2.4 Preliminaries
In this subsection, basic material which is used in this article, is presented.
Also, new ideas and their clarifications are elicited.
Basic idea is about the model which is used. First definition introduces basic
model.
Definition 2.4.1. (Graph).
G = (V, E) is called a graph if V is a set of objects and E is a subset of V × V
(E is a set of 2-subsets of V ) where V is called vertex set and E is called
edge set. Every two vertices have been corresponded to at most one edge.
Neutrosophic graph is the foundation of results in this paper which is defined
76
2.4. Preliminaries
as follows. Also, some related notions are demonstrated.

µ(vi vj ) ≤ σ(vi ) ∧ σ(vj ).
(i) : σ is called neutrosophic vertex set.

(ii) : µ is called neutrosophic edge set.
(iii) : |V | is called order of NTG and it’s denoted by O(N T G).
P P3
(iv) : v∈V i=1 σi (v) is called neutrosophic order of NTG and it’s denoted
by On (N T G).
(v) : |E| is called size of NTG and it’s denoted by S(N T G).
P P3
(vi) : e∈E i=1 µi (e) is called neutrosophic size of NTG and it’s denoted
by Sn (N T G).
Some classes of well-known neutrosophic graphs are defined. These classes
of neutrosophic graphs are used to form this study and the most results are
about them.
Definition 2.4.3. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then
(i) : a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is called path
where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N T G) − 1;
V
(ii) : strength of path P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is i=0,··· ,O(N T G)−1 µ(xi xi+1 );
(iii) : connectedness amid vertices x0 and xt is

_ ^
µ∞ (x0 , xt ) = µ(xi xi+1 );
P :x0 ,x1 ,··· ,xt i=0,··· ,t−1
(iv) : a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) , x0 is called

cycle where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , O(N T G) − 1, xO(N T G) x0 ∈ E
V there are two edges xy and uv such that µ(xy) = µ(uv) =
and
i=0,1,··· ,n−1 µ(vi vi+1 );
(v) : it’s t-partite where V is partitioned to t parts, V1s1 , V2s2 , · · · , Vtst and
s
the edge xy implies x ∈ Visi and y ∈ Vj j where i 6= j. If it’s complete,
then it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt where σi is σ on Visi instead V which
mean x 6∈ Vi induces σi (x) = 0. Also, |Vjsi | = si ;
(vi) : t-partite is complete bipartite if t = 2, and it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 ;
(vii) : complete bipartite is star if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted by S1,σ2 ;
(viii) : a vertex in V is center if the vertex joins to all vertices of a cycle. Then
it’s wheel and it’s denoted by W1,σ2 ;
77
2. Modified Notions
(ix) : it’s complete where ∀uv ∈ V, µ(uv) = σ(u) ∧ σ(v);

(x) : it’s strong where ∀uv ∈ E, µ(uv) = σ(u) ∧ σ(v).
To make them concrete, I bring preliminaries of this article in two upcoming
definitions in other ways.
µ(vi vj ) ≤ σ(vi ) ∧ σ(vj ).
|V | is called order of NTG and it’s denoted by O(N T G). Σv∈V σ(v) is called
neutrosophic order of NTG and it’s denoted by On (N T G).
Definition 2.4.5. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then it’s
complete and denoted by CM T σ if ∀x, y ∈ V,xy ∈ E and µ(xy) = σ(x) ∧ σ(y);
a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is called path and
it’s denoted by P T H where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , n − 1; a sequence of
consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) , x0 is called cycle and denoted by
CY C where xi xi+1 ∈ E, i = 0, 1, · · · , n − 1, xO(N VT G) x0 ∈ E and there are
two edges xy and uv such that µ(xy) = µ(uv) = i=0,1,··· ,n−1 µ(vi vi+1 ); it’s
t-partite where V is partitioned to t parts, V1s1 , V2s2 , · · · , Vtst and the edge xy
s
implies x ∈ Visi and y ∈ Vj j where i 6= j. If it’s complete, then it’s denoted
by CM T σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt where σi is σ on Visi instead V which mean x 6∈ Vi induces
σi (x) = 0. Also, |Vjsi | = si ; t-partite is complete bipartite if t = 2, and it’s
denoted by CM T σ1 ,σ2 ; complete bipartite is star if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted
by ST R1,σ2 ; a vertex in V is center if the vertex joins to all vertices of a cycle.
Then it’s wheel and it’s denoted by W HL1,σ2 .
Remark 2.4.6. Using notations which is mixed with literatures, are reviewed.
2.4.6.1. N T G = (V, E, σ = (σ1 , σ2 , σ3 ), µ = (µ1 , µ2 , µ3 )), O(N T G), and
On (N T G);
2.4.6.2. CM T σ , P T H, CY C, ST R1,σ2 , CM T σ1 ,σ2 , CM T σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt , and
W HL1,σ2 .
Definition 2.4.7. (k-number-resolving numbers).
Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then
(i) for given vertices n and n0 if
d(s1 , n) 6= d(s1 , n0 ), d(s2 , n) 6= d(s2 , n0 ), . . . , d(sk , n) 6= d(sk , n0 ),
then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 . Let S be a set of
neutrosophic vertices [a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is
called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic vertices n and
n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in
S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 , then the set
of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-resolving set. The
minimum cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called k-
number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G);
78
2.4. Preliminaries
(ii) for given vertices n and n0 if

neutrosophic vertices [a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called
neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic vertices n and n0 in
V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that
s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 , then the set of neutrosophic
vertices, S is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving set. The
minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets
is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted
by Nnk (N T G).
For convenient usages, the word neutrosophic which is used in previous
definition, won’t be used, usually.
92prp1 Proposition 2.4.8. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then k-
number-resolving number is greater than k.
Proof. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then for given vertices

n and n0 if

If for every neutrosophic vertices n and n0 in V \S, there are at least neutrosophic
vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 ,
then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-resolving set. The
minimum cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called k-number-
resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G); thus N k (N T G) ≥ k.
92prp2 Proposition 2.4.9. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. If |S| = k,

then k-number-resolving number is k.
Proof. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a neutrosophic graph. Then for given vertices

n and n0 if

resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (N T G); thus N k (N T G) ≥ k and by
Proposition (2.4.8). By |S| = k and N k (N T G) ≥ k, N k (N T G) = k.
In next part, clarifications about main definition are given. To avoid

confusion and for convenient usages, examples are usually used after every part
and names are used in the way that, abbreviation, simplicity, and summarization
are the matters of mind.
79
2. Modified Notions

(ii) in the setting of complete, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to
resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving
is different from k-number-resolving. Resolving number and k-number-
resolving number are the same if k = 1;
(iii) all minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving
number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .
For given vertices n and n0 if

V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such
that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 , then the set of neutrosophic
vertices, S is called k-number-resolving set. The minimum cardinality
between all k-number-resolving sets is called k-number-resolving number
and it’s denoted by N k (N T G) = k, k = O(N T G) − 1; and corresponded
to k-number-resolving sets are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ;
(iv) there are four k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
so as it’s possible to have one of them as a set corresponded to neutrosophic

k-number-resolving number so as neutrosophic cardinality is characteristic;
(v) there are three k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,
corresponded to k-number-resolving number as if there’s one k-number-

resolving set corresponded to neutrosophic k-number-resolving number so
as neutrosophic cardinality is the determiner;
(vi) all k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving number
are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .
80
2.5. Setting of k-number-resolving number
Figure 2.1: A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-resolving

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number. 92NTG1

vertices, S is called k-number-resolving set. The minimum neutrosophic
cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called neutrosophic
k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nnk (N T G) = 3.9, k =
O(N T G) − 1; and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .
2.5 Setting of k-number-resolving number

In this section, I provide some results in the setting of k-number-resolving
number. Some classes of neutrosophic graphs are chosen. Complete-neutrosophic
graph, path-neutrosophic graph, cycle-neutrosophic graph, star-neutrosophic
graph, bipartite-neutrosophic graph, t-partite-neutrosophic graph, and wheel-
neutrosophic graph, are both of cases of study and classes which the results are
about them.
Then
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
Thus,
N O(CM T σ )−1 (CM T σ ) = O(CM T σ ) − 1.

complete, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number resolves
as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving is different from k-number-
resolving. Resolving number and k-number-resolving number are the same if
k = 1. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving
81
2. Modified Notions
number are
{n2 , n3 , n4 , . . . , nO(CM T σ )−2 , nO(CM T σ )−1 , nO(CM T σ ) },

...
{n1 , n2 , n3 , . . . , nO(CM T σ )−3 , nO(CM T σ )−2 , nO(CM T σ )−1 }.

resolving number and it’s denoted by
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
Thus,
N O(CM T σ )−1 (CM T σ ) = O(CM T σ ) − 1;
and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are

...
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
Thus,
N O(CM T σ )−1 (CM T σ ) = O(CM T σ ) − 1.


Then k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where k > 1.
Then the number of k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving
number is O(CM T σ ) − 1.
82

Then the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(CM T σ ).
number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .
and it’s denoted by N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = O(CM T σ ) − 1; and
corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ;

{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,
83
2. Modified Notions


are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nnk (CM T σ ) = 3.9, k =
O(CM T σ ) − 1; and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

graph.
N k (P T H) = k, k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H).

n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(P T H) be a path-neutrosophic graph. For given two vertices, x
and y, there’s one path from x to y. In the setting of path, a vertex of resolving
set corresponded to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve
in the setting of resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded
to k-number-resolving number are
{n1 }1 , {nO(P T H) }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

{ni , nj , nk }3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }4 , {ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ,
...,
84
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , . . . , nt }O(P T H) .

N k (P T H) = k, k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H);
{n1 }1 , {nO(P T H) }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

...,
Thus
N k (P T H) = k, k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H).

isn’t equal to one, then all leaves belong k-number-resolving sets corresponded to
k-number-resolving number.
least one leaf doesn’t belong k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-
resolving number, then k is equal to two where k = 1.
resolving number, then k is equal to O(P T H) choose k where k 6= 1.

vertices;
(ii) in the setting of path, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to
resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve in the
setting of resolving;
85
2. Modified Notions
(iii) all minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-

resolving number are
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

{ni , nj , nk }3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }4 , {ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .

minimum cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called
k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (P T H) = k, k =
1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H); and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets
are
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

{ni , nj , nk }3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }4 , {ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ;
(iv) there are some k-number-resolving sets
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,


to neutrosophic k-number-resolving number so as neutrosophic
(v) there are some k-number-resolving sets
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

corresponded to k-number-resolving number as if there’s one

k-number-resolving set corresponded to neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number so as neutrosophic cardinality is the determiner;
(vi) all k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving
number are
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,


86

n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk
in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 , then
the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-number-resolving
set. The minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-
resolving sets is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and
it’s denoted by Nn1 (P T H) = 1.2, Nn2 (P T H) = 1.9, Nn3 (P T H) =
3.1, Nn4 (P T H) = 4.5, Nn5 (P T H) = 6.3; and corresponded to k-
number-resolving sets are
{n5 }1 , {n3 , n4 }2 , {n3 , n5 }2 ,
{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n3 , n4 , n5 , n1 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

vertices;
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .
are
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ;

{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ,
87
2. Modified Notions

{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ,

number are
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .

3.3, Nn4 (P T H) = 3.9, Nn5 (P T H) = 5.1, Nn6 (P T H) = 7.8; and
{n6 }1 , {n3 , n2 }2 , {n3 , n2 , n4 }3 ,

{n3 , n2 , n4 , n6 }4 , {n3 , n2 , n4 , n6 , n1 }5 , {n3 , n2 , n4 , n6 , n1 , n5 }6 .

O(CY C) ≥ 3. Then
N k (CY C) = k, k = 2, 3, . . . , O(CY C).

n1 , n2 , · · · , nO(CY C)−1 , nO(CY C) , n1

vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t
88


k-number-resolve in the setting of resolving. In the setting of cycle, always

k > 1. Antipodal vertices play roles when k = 2 such that they’re excluded
from k-number-resolving sets but they play no role when k = 6 2. All minimal
k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving number are
{ni , nj }2excluding antipodal vertices ,

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .

89
2. Modified Notions

N k (CY C) = k, k = 2, 3, . . . , O(CY C);

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ;
Thus
N k (CY C) = k, k = 2, 3, . . . , O(CY C).


vertices;
(ii) in the setting of cycle, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to
setting of resolving. In the setting of cycle, always k > 1. Antipodal
vertices play roles when k = 2 such that they’re excluded from
k-number-resolving sets but they play no role when k 6= 2;

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .

90

k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (CY C) = k, k =
2, 3, . . . , O(CY C); and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ;
{ni , nj , nk }2,3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }2,3,4 , {ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }2,3,4,5 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }2,3,4,5,6 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ,
number are
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .
it’s denoted by Nn2 (CY C) = 1.3, Nn3 (CY C) = 2.6, Nn4 (CY C) =
4.1, Nn5 (CY C) = 6.0, Nn6 (CY C) = 7.5; and corresponded to k-
{n1 , n5 }2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n5 , n4 , n6 }4 , {n1 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 }5 ,
{n1 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 , n2 }6 .
91
2. Modified Notions

vertices;
setting of resolving. In the setting of cycle, always k > 1;
{ni , nj }2 , {ni , nj , nk }3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }4 ,

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .


{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ;
{ni , nj }2 , {ni , nj , nk }2,3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }2,3,4 ,

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }2,3,4,5 ,


{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ,

number are
92

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .

6.2, Nn5 (CY C) = 8.5; and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets
are
{n1 , n5 }2 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }3 , {n1 , n5 , n2 , n4 }4 ,

{n1 , n5 , n2 , n4 , n3 }5 .

center c. Then

N O(ST R1,σ2 ) (ST R1,σ2 ) = O(ST R1,σ2 ).
k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1, O(ST R1,σ2 ).

have one as their lengths, forever. In the setting of star, a vertex of resolving
93
2. Modified Notions


O(ST R )−2
1,σ2
V \ {nO(ST R1,σ2 ) , ni }ni 6=nO(ST R
, V \ {ni }O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 , V O(ST R1,σ2 ) .
1,σ2 )


k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1, O(ST R1,σ2 );
O(ST R )−2
1,σ2
, V \ {ni }O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 , V O(ST R1,σ2 ) .
1,σ2 )
Thus

94

k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where k 6= 1.
center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(ST R1,σ2 ) choose

O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2 plus O(ST R1,σ2 ) plus one where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(ST R1,σ2 ) plus one where
k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ).

center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving

number is O(ST R1,σ2 ) choose O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2 where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving

number is O(ST R1,σ2 ) where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving

number is one where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ).

items as follows.
(ii) in the setting of star, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving

number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve in the setting of resolving;

number are
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,

{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
95
2. Modified Notions

and it’s denoted by N k (ST R1,σ2 ) = k, k = O(ST R1,σ2 )−2, O(ST R1,σ2 )−
1, O(ST R1,σ2 ); and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,

{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
(iv) there are ten k-number-resolving sets
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,

{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,

(v) there are ten k-number-resolving sets
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,

{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,

are

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .

96


is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
Nn3 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 3.9, Nn4 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 5.8, Nn5 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 7.6; and
{n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

N O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2.
N O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).
k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).

resolves any given vertex. Assume same parity for same partition of vertex set
which means V1 has odd indexes and V2 has even indexes. In the setting of
complete-bipartite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number
resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving is different from
k-number-resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-
number-resolving number are
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
V \ {n1i , n2j }n1 6=n2 , V \ {ni }O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1 , V O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) .
i j
97
2. Modified Notions


k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 );
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
i j
Thus


graph. Then k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where
k 6= 1.
graph with center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-resolving sets is |V1 | multiplying |V2 | plus
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) plus one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) plus one where
k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).
number is |V1 | multiplying |V2 | where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2;
number is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1;
number is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).
98

(ii) in the setting of complete-bipartite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded
to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as
resolving is different from k-number-resolving;
number are
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = k, k =
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ); and corresponded
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ;
(iv) there are nine k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }2,3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }2,3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }2,3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }2,3,4 ,

99
2. Modified Notions
(v) there are nine k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,


are
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) =
2.4, Nn3 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 3.9, Nn4 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.8; and corresponded to
k-number-resolving sets are
{n4 , n2 }2 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

graph where t ≥ 3 and |Vi ≥ 2. Then
N O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2.
N O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).
k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).

neutrosophic graph. Every vertex in a part is k-number-resolved by another
complete-t-partite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number
100

k-number-resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to

k-number-resolving number are
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
V \ {nri , nsj }nr 6=ns , V \ {ni }O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1 , V O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) .
i j

k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt );
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
i j
Thus

101
2. Modified Notions

k 6= 1.

O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) plus one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) plus one
where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).


number is |V1 | multiplying |V2 | where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2;

number is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1;

number is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).

(ii) in the setting of complete-t-partite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded


number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

102

and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = k, k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) −
2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ); and corresponded to k-
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
(iv) there are sixteen k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }3,4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4,5 ,

(v) there are sixteen k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,

are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 . Let S be a set of neut-

rosophic vertices [a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called
103
2. Modified Notions


k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nn3 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) =
3.8, Nn4 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 5.3, Nn5 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 7.2; and corres-
ponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

Then
N 1 = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3.
N O(W HL1,σ2 ) (W HL1,σ2 ) = O(W HL1,σ2 ).
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ).

of edges amid them is either one or two because of center and the notion
of neighbors. In the setting of wheel, a vertex of resolving set corresponded
to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving
is different from k-number-resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets
corresponded to k-number-resolving number are
O(W HL )−3
V \ {nri , nsj , nO(W HL1,σ2 ) }nr ns ∈E,n
1,σ2
r ,ns ,n
O(W HL are pairwise disjoint. ,
i j i j 1,σ2 )
V \ {ni }O(W HL1,σ2 )−1 , V O(W HL1,σ2 ) .
104

N 1 = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3.

k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 );
O(W HL )−3
1,σ2
r ,ns ,n
i j i j 1,σ2 )
V \ {ni }O(W HL1,σ2 )−1 , V O(W HL1,σ2 ) .
Thus
N 1 = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3.
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ).


Then k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where k 6= 1.
Proposition 2.5.30. Let N T G : (V, E, σ, µ) be a wheel-neutrosophic graph with
center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1 plus

O(W HL1,σ2 ) plus one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(W HL1,σ2 ) plus one where
k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ).

center c. Then

number is O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1 where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3;
105
2. Modified Notions

number is O(W HL1,σ2 ) where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1;
number is one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ).
(ii) in the setting of wheel, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving
number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving is different
from k-number-resolving;
number are
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

and it’s denoted by
N 1 = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3.
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 );
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
106
(iv) there are fourteen k-number-resolving sets
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2,3,4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4,5 ,

(v) there are fourteen k-number-resolving sets
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,

are
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
Nn1 = 2.4.
O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = 5.3.
O(W HL1,σ2 )
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = 7.2.
107
2. Modified Notions

k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 );

{n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
2.6 Setting of neutrosophic k-number-resolving number

In this section, I provide some results in the setting of neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number. Some classes of neutrosophic graphs are chosen. Complete-
neutrosophic graph, path-neutrosophic graph, cycle-neutrosophic graph, star-
neutrosophic graph, bipartite-neutrosophic graph, t-partite-neutrosophic graph,
and wheel-neutrosophic graph, are both of cases of study and classes which the
results are about them.
Then
3
X
Nnk (CM T σ ) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
|S|=O(CM T σ )−1
i=1
Thus,
3
X
NnO(CM T σ )−1 (CM T σ ) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
|S|=O(CM T σ )−1
i=1

complete, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number resolves
108
2.6. Setting of neutrosophic k-number-resolving number
as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving is different from k-number-

resolving. Resolving number and k-number-resolving number are the same if
k = 1. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving
number are

...

minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-resolving sets is called
neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
3
X
|S|=O(CM T σ )−1
i=1
Thus,
3
X
NnO(CM T σ )−1 (CM T σ ) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = O(CM T σ ) − 1;
|S|=O(CM T σ )−1
i=1

...
N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
Thus,
3
X
|S|=O(CM T σ )−1
i=1
109
2. Modified Notions
Thus,
3
X
NnO(CM T σ )−1 (CM T σ ) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = O(CM T σ ) − 1.
|S|=O(CM T σ )−1
i=1

Then k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where k > 1.
Then the number of k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving
number is O(CM T σ ) − 1.
Then the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(CM T σ ).


number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

and it’s denoted by N k (CM T σ ) = k, k = O(CM T σ ) − 1; and
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ;
110

{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,

are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nnk (CM T σ ) = 3.9, k =
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

graph.
111
2. Modified Notions

3
X
Nnk (P T H) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H).
|S|=k
i=1

n1 , n2 , . . . , nO(P T H) be a path-neutrosophic graph. For given two vertices, x
and y, there’s one path from x to y. In the setting of path, a vertex of resolving
{n1 }1 , {nO(P T H) }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
...,
3
X
Nnk (P T H) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H);
|S|=k
i=1

{n1 }1 , {nO(P T H) }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
...,
Thus
3
X
Nnk (P T H) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , O(P T H).
|S|=k
i=1

isn’t equal to one, then all leaves belong k-number-resolving sets corresponded to
k-number-resolving number.
resolving number, then k is equal to two where k = 1.
112

resolving number, then k is equal to O(P T H) choose k where k 6= 1.
vertices;
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
are
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk }3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }4 , {ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ;

{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
113
2. Modified Notions

number are
{n1 }1 , {n5 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,


3.1, Nn4 (P T H) = 4.5, Nn5 (P T H) = 6.3; and corresponded to k-
{n5 }1 , {n3 , n4 }2 , {n3 , n5 }2 ,

{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n3 , n4 , n5 , n1 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

vertices;
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .

114

are
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ;

{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ,
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ,
number are
{n1 }1 , {n6 }1 , {ni , nj }2 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .
3.3, Nn4 (P T H) = 3.9, Nn5 (P T H) = 5.1, Nn6 (P T H) = 7.8; and
{n6 }1 , {n3 , n2 }2 , {n3 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n3 , n2 , n4 , n6 }4 , {n3 , n2 , n4 , n6 , n1 }5 , {n3 , n2 , n4 , n6 , n1 , n5 }6 .
115
2. Modified Notions



O(CY C) ≥ 3. Then
3
X
Nnk (CY C) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = 2, 3, . . . , O(CY C).
|S|=k
i=1

n1 , n2 , · · · , nO(CY C)−1 , nO(CY C) , n1

vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t
k-number-resolve in the setting of resolving. In the setting of cycle, always
k > 1. Antipodal vertices play roles when k = 2 such that they’re excluded
from k-number-resolving sets but they play no role when k 6= 2. All minimal
k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-number-resolving number are
116

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .

3
X
Nnk (CY C) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = 2, 3, . . . , O(CY C);
|S|=k
i=1

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ;
Thus
3
X
Nnk (CY C) = min σi (x)x∈S , k = 2, 3, . . . , O(CY C).
|S|=k
i=1


vertices;
setting of resolving. In the setting of cycle, always k > 1. Antipodal
vertices play roles when k = 2 such that they’re excluded from
k-number-resolving sets but they play no role when k 6= 2;
117
2. Modified Notions


{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .


{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ;

{ni , nj , nk }2,3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }2,3,4 , {ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }2,3,4,5 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }2,3,4,5,6 ,


{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 ,

number are

118
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns , nt }6 .

4.1, Nn5 (CY C) = 6.0, Nn6 (CY C) = 7.5; and corresponded to k-
{n1 , n5 }2 ,
{n1 , n5 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n5 , n4 , n6 }4 , {n1 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 }5 ,
{n1 , n5 , n4 , n6 , n3 , n2 }6 .

vertices;
setting of resolving. In the setting of cycle, always k > 1;

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .


{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ;
119
2. Modified Notions

{ni , nj }2 , {ni , nj , nk }2,3 , {ni , nj , nk , nr }2,3,4 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }2,3,4,5 ,
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 ,
number are
{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .
6.2, Nn5 (CY C) = 8.5; and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets
are
{n1 , n5 }2 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }3 , {n1 , n5 , n2 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n5 , n2 , n4 , n3 }5 .

center c. Then
3
O(ST R1,σ2 )−2
X
Nn (ST R1,σ2 ) = min σi (x)x∈S .
S=V \{nO(ST R1,σ ) ,ni }ni 6=nO(ST R
2 1,σ2 ) i=1
3
O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(ST R1,σ2 )
Nn (ST R1,σ2 ) = On (ST R1,σ2 ).
120



have one as their lengths, forever. In the setting of star, a vertex of resolving
O(ST R )−2
1,σ2
, V \ {ni }O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 , V O(ST R1,σ2 ) .
1,σ2 )

121
2. Modified Notions

3
O(ST R1,σ2 )−2
X
2 1,σ2 ) i=1
3
O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(ST R1,σ2 )
Nn (ST R1,σ2 ) = On (ST R1,σ2 ).
k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2, O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1, O(ST R1,σ2 );
O(ST R )−2
1,σ2
, V \ {ni }O(ST R1,σ2 )−1 , V O(ST R1,σ2 ) .
1,σ2 )
Thus
3
O(ST R1,σ2 )−2
X
2 1,σ2 ) i=1
3
O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(ST R1,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(ST R1,σ2 )
Nn (ST R1,σ2 ) = On (ST R1,σ2 ).


k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where k 6= 1.
center c. Then
(i) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(ST R1,σ2 ) choose
O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2 plus O(ST R1,σ2 ) plus one where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(ST R1,σ2 ) plus one where
k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ).
center c. Then
number is O(ST R1,σ2 ) choose O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2 where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 2;
number is O(ST R1,σ2 ) where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ) − 1;
number is one where k = O(ST R1,σ2 ).
122

items as follows.
(ii) in the setting of star, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving
number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve in the setting of resolving;
number are
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,
{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
and it’s denoted by N k (ST R1,σ2 ) = k, k = O(ST R1,σ2 )−2, O(ST R1,σ2 )−
1, O(ST R1,σ2 ); and corresponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,
{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
(iv) there are ten k-number-resolving sets

{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,
{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,
123
2. Modified Notions

(v) there are ten k-number-resolving sets
{n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n4 , n5 }3 ,

{n3 , n4 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,


are

{ni , nj , nk , nr , ns }5 .

is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
Nn3 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 3.9, Nn4 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 5.8, Nn5 (ST R1,σ2 ) = 7.6; and
{n2 , n3 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
124

3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
X
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = min
1 2
σi (x)x∈S .
S=V \{ni ,nj }n1 6=n2
i j i=1
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1
X
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = min σi (x)x∈S .
|S|=O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = On (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).

resolves any given vertex. Assume same parity for same partition of vertex set
which means V1 has odd indexes and V2 has even indexes. In the setting of
complete-bipartite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number
k-number-resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to k-
number-resolving number are
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
i j

3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
X
1 2
σi (x)x∈S .
S=V \{ni ,nj }n1 6=n2
i j i=1
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = On (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).
k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 );
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
i j
125
2. Modified Notions
Thus
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−2
X
1 2
σi (x)x∈S .
S=V \{ni ,nj }n1 6=n2
i j i=1
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 )
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = On (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).


k 6= 1.

O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) plus one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) plus one where
k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).


number is |V1 | multiplying |V2 | where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2;

number is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1;

number is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ).

126
(ii) in the setting of complete-bipartite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded


number are
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = k, k =
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ); and corresponded
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ;
(iv) there are nine k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }2,3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }2,3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }2,3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }2,3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }2,3,4 ,

(v) there are nine k-number-resolving sets
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,

127
2. Modified Notions


are
{n1 , n2 }2 , {n1 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n2 }2 ,

{n4 , n3 }2 , {n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nn2 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) =
2.4, Nn3 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 3.9, Nn4 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ) = 5.8; and corresponded to
{n4 , n2 }2 , {n2 , n3 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 .

graph where t ≥ 3 and |Vi ≥ 2. Then
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
X
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = min
r s
σi (x)x∈S
S=V \{ni ,nj }nr 6=ns
i j i=1
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1
X
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = min σi (x)x∈S .
|S|=O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1
i=1
128
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )

Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = On (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).
neutrosophic graph. Every vertex in a part is k-number-resolved by another
complete-t-partite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving number
k-number-resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets corresponded to
k-number-resolving number are
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
i j

3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
X
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = min
r s
σi (x)x∈S
i j i=1
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1
X
|S|=O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1
i=1
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )
k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt );
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
i j
Thus
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−2
X
Nn (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = min
r s
σi (x)x∈S
i j i=1
3
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1
X
|S|=O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )−1
i=1
O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt )

129
2. Modified Notions

k 6= 1.

O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) plus one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) plus one
where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).


number is |V1 | multiplying |V2 | where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 2;

number is O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1;

number is one where k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ).

(ii) in the setting of complete-t-partite, a vertex of resolving set corresponded


number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

130

and it’s denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = k, k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) −
2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ); and corresponded to k-
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }3,4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4,5 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,

are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 . Let S be a set of neut-

rosophic vertices [a vertex alongside triple pair of its values is called
131
2. Modified Notions


k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by Nn3 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) =
3.8, Nn4 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 5.3, Nn5 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 7.2; and corres-
ponded to k-number-resolving sets are
{n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

Then
3
X
Nn1 = min σi (x)x∈S .
S=V \{nri ,nsj ,nO(W HL1,σ ) }nr ns ∈E,nr ,ns ,nO(W HL are pairwise disjoint.
2 i j i j 1,σ2 ) i=1
3
O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
X
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = min σi (x)x∈S .
|S|=O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(W HL1,σ2 )
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = On (W HL1,σ2 ).
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ).

of edges amid them is either one or two because of center and the notion
of neighbors. In the setting of wheel, a vertex of resolving set corresponded
to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving
132
is different from k-number-resolving. All minimal k-number-resolving sets

corresponded to k-number-resolving number are
O(W HL )−3
1,σ2
r ,ns ,n
i j i j 1,σ2 )
V \ {ni }O(W HL1,σ2 )−1 , V O(W HL1,σ2 ) .

3
X
2 i j i j 1,σ2 ) i=1
3
O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(W HL1,σ2 )
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = On (W HL1,σ2 ).
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 );
O(W HL )−3
1,σ2
r ,ns ,n
i j i j 1,σ2 )
V \ {ni }O(W HL1,σ2 )−1 , V O(W HL1,σ2 ) .
Thus
3
X
2 i j i j 1,σ2 ) i=1
3
O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
X
|S|=O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
i=1
O(W HL1,σ2 )
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = On (W HL1,σ2 ).
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ).


Then k-number-resolving number isn’t equal to resolving number where k 6= 1.
center c. Then
133
2. Modified Notions
(i) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1 plus

O(W HL1,σ2 ) plus one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3;
(ii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is O(W HL1,σ2 ) plus one where
k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1;
(iii) the number of k-number-resolving sets is one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ).

center c. Then

number is O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1 where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3;
number is O(W HL1,σ2 ) where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1;
number is one where k = O(W HL1,σ2 ).

(ii) in the setting of wheel, a vertex of resolving set corresponded to resolving
number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-resolve so as resolving is different
from k-number-resolving;
number are
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .

and it’s denoted by
N 1 = O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 3.
134

k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 );
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
(iv) there are fourteen k-number-resolving sets
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }1,2,3,4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }1,2,3,4,5 ,

(v) there are fourteen k-number-resolving sets
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,


are
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n5 , n2 }1 , {n2 , n3 }1 ,

{n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n4 , n5 }1 , {n1 , n5 , n2 }1 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }1 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }1 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
135
2. Modified Notions


k-number-resolving number and it’s denoted by
Nn1 = 2.4.
O(W HL1,σ2 )−1
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = 5.3.
O(W HL1,σ2 )
Nn (W HL1,σ2 ) = 7.2.
k = 1, O(W HL1,σ2 ) − 1, O(W HL1,σ2 );
{n4 , n5 }1 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
2.7 Applications in Time Table and Scheduling

In this section, two applications for time table and scheduling are provided where
the models are either complete models which mean complete connections are
formed as individual and family of complete models with common neutrosophic
vertex set or quasi-complete models which mean quasi-complete connections
are formed as individual and family of quasi-complete models with common
neutrosophic vertex set.
Designing the programs to achieve some goals is general approach to apply on
some issues to function properly. Separation has key role in the context of this
136
2.8. Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its k-number-resolving
number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number 92NTG20
style. Separating the duration of work which are consecutive, is the matter and
it has importance to avoid mixing up.
Step 1. (Definition) Time table is an approach to get some attributes to do
the work fast and proper. The style of scheduling implies special attention
to the tasks which are consecutive.
Step 2. (Issue) Scheduling of program has faced with difficulties to differ amid
consecutive sections. Beyond that, sometimes sections are not the same.
Step 3. (Model) The situation is designed as a model. The model uses data to
assign every section and to assign to relation amid sections, three numbers
belong unit interval to state indeterminacy, possibilities and determinacy.
There’s one restriction in that, the numbers amid two sections are at least
the number of the relations amid them. Table (2.1), clarifies about the
assigned numbers to these situations.
Table 2.1: Scheduling concerns its Subjects and its Connections as a neutrosophic
graph in a Model. 92tbl1
Sections of N T G n1 n2 · · · n5
Values (0.7, 0.9, 0.3) (0.4, 0.2, 0.8)· · · (0.4, 0.2, 0.8)
Connections of N T G E1 E2 · · · E6
Values (0.4, 0.2, 0.3) (0.5, 0.2, 0.3)· · · (0.3, 0.2, 0.3)
2.8 Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its

k-number-resolving number and its neutrosophic
k-number-resolving number
Step 4. (Solution) The neutrosophic graph alongside its k-number-resolving

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number as model, propose
137
2. Modified Notions
to use specific number. Every subject has connection with some subjects.
Thus the connection is applied as possible and the model demonstrates
quasi-full connections as quasi-possible. Using the notion of strong on
the connection amid subjects, causes the importance of subject goes in
the highest level such that the value amid two consecutive subjects, is
determined by those subjects. If the configuration is star, the number
is different. Also, it holds for other types such that complete, wheel,
path, and cycle. The collection of situations is another application of
its k-number-resolving number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving
number when the notion of family is applied in the way that all members
of family are from same classes of neutrosophic graphs. As follows, there
are five subjects which are represented as Figure (2.20). This model is
strong and even more it’s quasi-complete. And the study proposes using
specific number which is called its k-number-resolving number and its
neutrosophic k-number-resolving number. There are also some analyses
on other numbers in the way that, the clarification is gained about being
special number or not. Also, in the last part, there is one neutrosophic
number to assign to this model and situation to compare them with same
situations to get more precise. Consider Figure (2.20). In Figure (2.20),
an complete-t-partite-neutrosophic graph is illustrated. Some points are
(i) For given two neutrosophic vertices, n and n0 , there is either one
path with length one or one path with length two between them;
(ii) in the setting of complete-t-partite, a vertex of resolving set
corresponded to resolving number resolves as if it doesn’t k-number-
resolve so as resolving is different from k-number-resolving;
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,

{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve n and n0 . Let S be a set

of neutrosophic vertices [a vertex alongside triple pair of its
values is called neutrosophic vertex.]. If for every neutrosophic
vertices n and n0 in V \ S, there are at least neutrosophic
vertices s1 , s2 , . . . , sk in S such that s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-resolve
n and n0 , then the set of neutrosophic vertices, S is called k-
number-resolving set. The minimum cardinality between all k-
number-resolving sets is called k-number-resolving number and it’s
denoted by N k (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = k, k = O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) −
2, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) − 1, O(CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ); and corresponded to
138
2.8. Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its k-number-resolving
number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ;
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }3,4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }3,4,5 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 ,
number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n4 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n4 , n3 , n5 }3 ,
{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n4 , n5 }4 ,
{n1 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
it’s denoted by Nn3 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 3.8, Nn4 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) =
5.3, Nn5 (CM C σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt ) = 7.2; and corresponded to k-number-
resolving sets are
{n4 , n2 , n5 }3 , {n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }4 , {n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 , n5 }5 .
139
2. Modified Notions

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number 92NTG21
2.9 Case 2: Complete Model alongside its

Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its
k-number-resolving number and its neutrosophic
Step 4. (Solution) The neutrosophic graph alongside its k-number-resolving

number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number as model, propose
to use specific number. Every subject has connection with every given
subject in deemed way. Thus the connection applied as possible and the
model demonstrates full connections as possible between parts but with
different view where symmetry amid vertices and edges are the matters.
Using the notion of strong on the connection amid subjects, causes the
importance of subject goes in the highest level such that the value amid two
consecutive subjects, is determined by those subjects. If the configuration
is complete multipartite, the number is different. Also, it holds for other
types such that star, wheel, path, and cycle. The collection of situations is
another application of its k-number-resolving number and its neutrosophic
k-number-resolving number when the notion of family is applied in the
way that all members of family are from same classes of neutrosophic
graphs. As follows, there are four subjects which are represented in the
formation of one model as Figure (2.21). This model is neutrosophic
strong as individual and even more it’s complete. And the study proposes
using specific number which is called its k-number-resolving number and
its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number for this model. There are
also some analyses on other numbers in the way that, the clarification is
gained about being special number or not. Also, in the last part, there
is one neutrosophic number to assign to these models as individual. A
model as a collection of situations to compare them with another model
as a collection of situations to get more precise. Consider Figure (2.21).
There is one section for clarifications.
(ii) in the setting of complete, a vertex of resolving set corresponded
140
2.9. Case 2: Complete Model alongside its Neutrosophic Graph in the
Viewpoint of its k-number-resolving number and its neutrosophic
resolving is different from k-number-resolving. Resolving number
and k-number-resolving number are the same if k = 1;
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

number-resolving number and it’s denoted by N k (CM T σ ) = k, k =
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ;
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 , n4 }4 ,

{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 ,

number are
{n1 , n2 , n3 }3 , {n1 , n2 , n4 }3 , {n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .

141
2. Modified Notions

minimum neutrosophic cardinality between all k-number-resolving
sets is called neutrosophic k-number-resolving number and it’s
denoted by Nnk (CM T σ ) = 3.9, k = O(CM T σ )−1; and corresponded
{n1 , n3 , n4 }3 .
2.10 Open Problems

In this section, some questions and problems are proposed to give some avenues
to pursue this study. The structures of the definitions and results give some
ideas to make new settings which are eligible to extend and to create new study.
Notion concerning its k-number-resolving number and its neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number are defined in neutrosophic graphs. Thus,
Question 2.10.1. Is it possible to use other types of its k-number-resolving
number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number?
Question 2.10.2. Are existed some connections amid different types of its k-
number-resolving number and its neutrosophic k-number-resolving number in
neutrosophic graphs?
Question 2.10.3. Is it possible to construct some classes of neutrosophic graphs
which have “nice” behavior?
Question 2.10.4. Which mathematical notions do make an independent study
to apply these types in neutrosophic graphs?
Problem 2.10.5. Which parameters are related to this parameter?
Problem 2.10.6. Which approaches do work to construct applications to create
independent study?
Problem 2.10.7. Which approaches do work to construct definitions which use
all definitions and the relations amid them instead of separate definitions to
create independent study?
2.11 Conclusion and Closing Remarks

In this section, concluding remarks and closing remarks are represented. The
drawbacks of this article are illustrated. Some benefits and advantages of this
study are highlighted.
This study uses two definitions concerning k-number-resolving number and
neutrosophic k-number-resolving number arising from k-number-resolved
vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Minimum
number of k-number-resolved vertices, is a number which is representative
based on those vertices. Minimum neutrosophic number of k-number-resolved
vertices corresponded to k-number-resolving set is called neutrosophic k-number-
resolving number. The connections of vertices which aren’t clarified by minimum
number of edges amid them differ them from each other and put them in different
categories to represent a number which is called k-number-resolving number
and neutrosophic k-number-resolving number arising from k-number-resolved
142
2.11. Conclusion and Closing Remarks
Table 2.2: A Brief Overview about Advantages and Limitations of this Study 92tbl
Advantages Limitations
1. k-number-resolving Number of Model 1. Connections amid Classes
2. Neutrosophic k-number-resolving Number of Model
3. Minimal k-number-resolving Sets 2. Study on Families
4. k-number-resolved Vertices amid all Vertices
5. Acting on All Vertices 3. Same Models in Family
vertices in neutrosophic graphs assigned to neutrosophic graphs. Further studies

could be about changes in the settings to compare these notions amid different
settings of neutrosophic graphs theory. One way is finding some relations amid
all definitions of notions to make sensible definitions. In Table (2.2), some
limitations and advantages of this study are pointed out.
143
Bibliography
Ref1 [1] M. Akram, and G. Shahzadi, “Operations on Single-Valued Neutrosophic

Graphs”, Journal of uncertain systems 11 (1) (2017) 1-26.
Ref2 [2] L. Aronshtam, and H. Ilani, “Bounds on the average and minimum at-
tendance in preference-based activity scheduling”, Discrete Applied Math-
ematics 306 (2022) 114-119. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2021.09.024.)
Ref3 [3] K. Atanassov, “Intuitionistic fuzzy sets”, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20 (1986) 87-96.
Ref4 [4] R.F. Bold, and I.G. Yero, “Error-correcting codes from k-resolving sets”,
arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.03141 (2016).
Ref5 [5] M. Bold, and M. Goerigk, “Investigating the recoverable ro-

bust single machine scheduling problem under interval uncer-
tainty”, Discrete Applied Mathematics 313 (2022) 99-114. (ht-
tps://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2022.02.005.)
Ref6 [6] S. Broumi et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic graphs”, Journal of New

Theory 10 (2016) 86-101.
Ref7 [7] J.M. Cabaro, and H. Rara, “Restrained 2-Resolving Dominating Sets in
the Join, Corona and Lexicographic Product of two Graphs”, European
Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics 15 (3) (2022) 1047-1053.
Ref8 [8] J.M. Cabaro, and H. Rara, “Restrained 2-resolving sets in the join, corona
and lexicographic product of two graphs”, European Journal of Pure and
Applied Mathematics 15 (3) (2022) 1229-1236.
Ref9 [9] J.M. Cabaro, and H. Rara, “On 2-Resolving Dominating Sets in the Join,
Corona and Lexicographic Product of two Graphs”, European Journal of
Pure and Applied Mathematics 15 (3) (2022) 1417-1425.
Ref10 [10] J.M. Cabaro, and H. Rara, “On 2-resolving Sets in the Join and Corona
of Graphs”, European Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics 14 (3)
(2021) 773-782.
Ref11 [11] K.N. Geetha, and B. Sooryanarayana, “2-metric dimension of cartesian

product of graphs”, International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathemat-
ics 112 (1) (2017) 27-45.
145
Bibliography
Ref12 [12] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio: E-

publishing: Educational Publisher 1091 West 1st Ave Grand-
Ref13 [13] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida: GLOBAL
KNOWLEDGE - Publishing House 848 Brickell Ave Ste 950
Miami, Florida 33131 United States. ISBN: 978-1-59973-743-0
(http://fs.unm.edu/NeutrosophicDuality.pdf ).
Ref14 [14] Henry Garrett, “Properties of SuperHyperGraph and Neut-
rosophic SuperHyperGraph”, Neutrosophic Sets and Sys-
tems 49 (2022) 531-561 (doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6456413).
(http://fs.unm.edu/NSS/NeutrosophicSuperHyperGraph34.pdf).
(https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nss_journal/vol49/iss1/34).
Ref15 [15] Henry Garrett, “Three Types of Neutrosophic Alliances based on Con-
nectedness and (Strong) Edges”, Preprints 2022, 2022010239 (doi:
10.20944/preprints202201.0239.v1).
Ref16 [16] B. Humera et al., “On 2-metric resolvability in rotationally-symmetric
graphs”, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems 40 (6) (2021) 11887-11895.
Ref17 [17] N. Shah, and A. Hussain, “Neutrosophic soft graphs”, Neutrosophic Set
and Systems 11 (2016) 31-44.
Ref18 [18] A. Shannon and K.T. Atanassov, “A first step to a theory of the
intuitionistic fuzzy graphs”, Proceeding of FUBEST (Lakov, D., Ed.)
Sofia (1994) 59-61.
Ref19 [19] F. Smarandache, “A Unifying field in logics neutrosophy: Neutrosophic
probability, set and logic, Rehoboth: ” American Research Press (1998).
Ref20 [20] H. Wang et al., “Single-valued neutrosophic sets”, Multispace and
Multistructure 4 (2010) 410-413.
Ref21 [21] D.A.R. Wardani et al., “The distance 2-resolving domination number
of graphs”, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1836 (1) (2021) IOP
Publishing.
Ref22 [22] L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets”, Information and Control 8 (1965) 338-354.
146

Neutrosophic K-Number

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Neutrosophic K-Number

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Neutrosophic k-Number

Ideas | Approaches | Accessibility | Availability

Dr. Henry Garrett

In this book, some notions are introduced about “Neutrosophic k-Number”.

cardinality between all k-number-dominating sets is called neutrosophic k-

The following references are cited by chapters.

[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Regularity of Every Element to Function in the

[Ref2] Henry Garrett, “Recognition of the Pattern for Vertices to Make

Dimension by Resolving in some Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs”, ResearchG-

[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Beyond Neutrosophic Graphs”, Ohio:

And in following by Henry Garrett (2022) which is indexed by Google Scholar

[Ref] Henry Garrett, (2022). “Neutrosophic Duality”, Florida:

Two chapters are devised as “Initial Notions”, and “Modified Notions”.

List of Tables xii

2.8 Case 1: Complete-t-partite Model alongside its k-number-

1.1 A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating

1.18 A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating

2.1 A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-resolving

2.21 A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-resolving

1.1 Scheduling concerns its Subjects and its Connections as a neutro-

2.1 Scheduling concerns its Subjects and its Connections as a neutro-

[Ref1] Henry Garrett, “Regularity of Every Element to Function in the

Regularity of Every Element to Function in the Type of

by N k (N T G); for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk

dominating Number, Classes of Neutrosophic Graphs

1.3 Motivation and Contributions

individuals. In both settings, corresponded numbers conclude the discussion.

Definition 1.4.2. (Neutrosophic Graph And Its Special Case).

µ(vi vj ) ≤ σ(vi ) ∧ σ(vj ).

(i) : σ is called neutrosophic vertex set.

(ii) : µ is called neutrosophic edge set.

(iii) : |V | is called order of NTG and it’s denoted by O(N T G).

Some classes of well-known neutrosophic graphs are defined. These classes

(i) : a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) is called path

(iii) : connectedness amid vertices x0 and xt is

(iv) : a sequence of consecutive vertices P : x0 , x1 , · · · , xO(N T G) , x0 is called

(vi) : t-partite is complete bipartite if t = 2, and it’s denoted by Kσ1 ,σ2 ;

(vii) : complete bipartite is star if |V1 | = 1, and it’s denoted by S1,σ2 ;

(ix) : it’s complete where ∀uv ∈ V, µ(uv) = σ(u) ∧ σ(v);

(x) : it’s strong where ∀uv ∈ E, µ(uv) = σ(u) ∧ σ(v).

To make them concrete, I bring preliminaries of this article in two upcoming

µ(vi vj ) ≤ σ(vi ) ∧ σ(vj ).

1.4.6.1. N T G = (V, E, σ = (σ1 , σ2 , σ3 ), µ = (µ1 , µ2 , µ3 )), O(N T G), and

1.4.6.2. CM T σ , P T H, CY C, ST R1,σ2 , CM T σ1 ,σ2 , CM T σ1 ,σ2 ,··· ,σt , and

Definition 1.4.7. (k-number-dominating numbers).

(i) for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

(ii) for given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

For convenient usages, the word neutrosophic which is used in previous

(ii) in the setting of complete, a vertex of dominating set corresponded to

(iii) all k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating

{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

For given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

(iv) there are some k-number-dominating sets

{n1 }1,2,3,4 , {n2 }1,2,3,4 , {n3 }1,2,3,4 ,

so as it’s possible to have one of them as a set corresponded to

(v) there are some k-number-dominating sets

{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

corresponded to k-number-dominating number as if there’s one k-number-

(vi) all k-number-dominating sets corresponded to k-number-dominating

{n1 }1 , {n2 }1 , {n3 }1 ,

For given vertex n, if s1 n, s2 n, . . . , sk n ∈ E, then s1 , s2 , . . . , sk k-number-

{n4 }1 , {n4 , n3 }2 , {n4 , n3 , n1 }3 ,

Figure 1.1: A Neutrosophic Graph in the Viewpoint of its k-number-dominating